Class JuiLVii 

Book ? kj>(t> 

Copightlf 

COPYRIGHT DEPOSIT. 



1 



LIVING THOUGHTS 



LIFE'S PROBLEMS: 



OR 



THE WORLD AS WE MAKE IT. 



BY 



J. WILSON, Ph. D. 



Author of "Practical Life,"' " Kadical Wrongs," "Life Without 
a Master," " The New Dispensation," &c, &c. 



New York, 
lemcke & buechner, 
812 Broadway, 
1904. 



LIBRARY of CONGRESS 
Two Conies Received 
JUN 10 1904 
Copyright Entry 

CLASS ft XXC. No. 

TiT I I 

COPY B 



Copyright, 1903, by J. Wilson. 



INTRODUCTORY. 



The great sin of the present day is not unbelief or misbelief, 
but the entire absence of belief of any kind. Not one man in a 
hundred really believes in God or the Bible, but perhaps ninety- 
nine out of a hundred imagine or believe that they do, and it is 
this serious misapprehension that causes the trouble. If people 
believed and lived up to their belief, it might answer pretty 
well, but when they have no belief at all, and no concern about 
any belief, what can you say or do for them ? 

It is certainly a remarkable fact that, with a very few strik- 
ing exceptions, no one cares to hear about salvation, either for 
this world or the world to come, and when it comes to such 
terms as redemption, regeneration or conversion, they hardly 
know what the words mean. In that direction they are simply 
without experience, and therefore they do not understand. Peo- 
ple have no interest in these subjects, and they do not care to 
hear the question discussed. People like a lighter and more 
palatable diet ; they want food that they can digest readily. 

No one wants to be told how to lead a better life — that is one 
of the last things that concerns the average man or woman. 
People want to enjoy themselves and do as they please. They 
are quite disinclined to take life seriously. There is indeed very 
little encouragement for either preachers or teachers at the open- 
ing of this century, and in their efforts to turn the present 
generation from its perverse and wicked ways, they meet with 
anything but encouraging success. 

There is no task more thankless than that of giving advice, 
even when it is asked. In most cases, the one who asks advice 
will hear what is said and then go and do exactly the contrary. 
To advise people, unasked, is presuming, and it will be found to 
be an impertinence that is sure to be resented. To give people 
information, or even suggestions, especially on the subject of im- 



4 



INTRODUCTORY. 



proved methods of living and doing, comes in the same category 
as giving people advice, and as a task it will be found, no doubt, 
equally thankless. 

But how shall people ever learn or improve ? If there were 
but one man in the world, he could not possibly make any pro- 
gress, either in science or art. Indeed, in this case there could 
be no science or art. People cannot learn of themselves, any 
more than a grain of wheat can grow of itself. In order that a 
grain of wheat may grow, certain favorable conditions must be 
met. And so it is with knowledge on the part of mankind. The 
germs of all knowledge, all truth, all light are in the mind of 
every individual; and yet these germs will never be of any value, 
they will never materialize, they will never take root and grow, 
untii these individuals come in contact with other individuals 
of their kind. It is true that knowledge, or learning, is something 
that cannot be transferred from one to another ; and still it is 
something also that cannot be rendered available without some 
assistance and some association with other individuals. 

People ought to do their own thinking, but as a matter of 
fact few are inclined in that direction. Most people desire re- 
sults without the necessity of expending much effort in securing 
those results. They want thoughts served up by others precisely 
as they order bread from the bakery, or canned fruits, meat and 
vegetables from the grocer, prepared and ready for immediate 
use. They have a conception, absurd as it is — most of them 
have — that time devoted to thought and serious study is just so 
much effort wasted. They are not able to perceive that there 
are any appreciable returns from such an investment. As they 
derive neither profit nor pleasure from an undertaking of that 
kind, they feel that they have nothing to show for the sacrifice 
made. 

Why should a business man, or a professional man, or why 
should a working man bestow much time or attention upon 
study or reflection? Such efforts do not properly come in his 
line. His vocation is simply to make money, and perhaps to ob- 
tain pleasure; and as there is neither money nor pleasure in 
thinking, the subject seems to him to be one in which he has no 
special concern. Such being the state of things as they exist 
now, and as they have existed from time immemorial, is it at all 
a matter of wonder that thinking should be left as the work of a 
few men ? Such is the fact, whether it is remarkable or not. A 
few men, a very few men, have always done the thinking by 
which progress in this world has been effected. A few men only 
are writers, a few only are speakers, and only a few are students 
in the proper sense of the term. In this connection it should b>e 



INTRODUCTORY. 



5 



remarked that success in any line, or in any department, is for 
the few, and usually for the very few. Only a few attain emi- 
nence in any department ; only a few become rich, only a few 
become learned, only a few become renowned in any of the walks 
of life. 

Bat is there any connection, accidental or otherwise, between 
thinking and success ? There certainly is. No man can achieve 
success to any extent in any enterprise without serious and long- 
continued inquiry and reflection. And in every case, it must be 
his own thought, his own study, his own reflection, upon which 
he must rely. What he finds that others have thought may give 
him a hint now and then, but in the main, he must either do his 
own work, or fail. And yet so few people think ! So far as the 
multitude is concerned, it seems to abhor thinking. At least 
thinking is ignored as something that is quite superfluous. The 
multitude never has thoughts — leaders and bosses and designing 
men alone have thoughts. It seems so much easier for people to 
trade on borrowed capital, and to use the thoughts that are sup- 
plied by other people. This is an age of trust, in more senses 
than one. 

It is a noticeable fact that writers of books, and especially 
those on social and moral topics like this, do not publish their 
own thoughts and sentiments only, but also to a certain extent 
the thoughts and sentiments of the masses. These thoughts are 
never property, certainly never personal or private property. 
They are not purchasable or procurable goods in any sense. 
They do not come at command, but always unsought and un- 
expected. They are purely a matter of inspiration and revela- 
tion. If anything comes from heaven, the thoughts of men do. 
The humblest man on earth is a messenger of God — as much so 
as Moses or Paul was, though not in the same manner and of 
course not to the same extent. If men had not had thoughts 
and expressed them, we had never known what God was, or in- 
deed that there ever was a God. In reality, God as we know 
him to-day is at best only a thought, a conception, a creation of 
man's brain. He is purely ideal, as everything else is that is not 
material. Every writer of books is an interpreter for the masses, 
a sort of amanuensis for the people. He writes what others 
think, and to a certain extent what all men think, but what they 
have not mastered, and what therefore they cannot express. 
With them the period of incubation is not yet completed. Hence 
the need of thinkers, writers, students, is obvious. These inter- 
preters for the public are indispensable, much as their services 
are sometimes decried or derided. Under another view of the 
case, every thinking, progressive man does merely the work of 



(5 



INTRODUCTORY. 



an agent, though his principal he never sees, and for what he 
does he is never called to account. There is a power impelling 
him onward which he never knows, never understands. All the 
world is a partner with him, a silent partner, in all that he 
undertakes. Indeed, he could have no thoughts and he could do 
nothing, if it were not for the world. How cruel and unjust it is 
for the world to complain of men, when it makes them what they 
are ! 

But whom shall the people select as their interpreters? This 
selection certainly ought not to seem a matter of indifference to 
them, nor should the result be left to chance. Almost all of the 
people's acquirements in the domain of knowledge, in the 
course of a lifetime, are taken on trust. Very little of the in- 
formation that they receive comes from personal observation. 
It is taken wholly on faith, and implicit reliance is placed upon 
the opinions of others, most of whom are entire strangers to the 
learner. People as a rule are amazingly credulous — there is a 
tendency in man to believe everything he hears, whether it is 
good or bad. For instance, men believe the Bible, or claim to do 
so, solely as an act of faith, a sort of duty devolving on them. But 
certain it is, so far as evidence is concerned, the sacred writings 
have absolutely nothing to sustain them. In other words, they 
have no foundation to stand on, so far as concerns reliable proof 
of a documentary character. Who wrote the different books of 
the Bible, or why they wrote them, or what was their character 
and standing, are all important points on which we have abso- 
lutely no light. That Christ did not write a word of the New 
Testament, is well enough ascertained ; that Moses even wrote a 
word of the Old Testament, has never been proven. But still 
our people, millions upon millions of people, believe the Bible, as 
a matter of faith and duty ! Just so there are thousands upon 
thousands who believe Joe Smith's Mormon bible, though it is 
well enough established that Joe Smith never wrote a word of 
that book. So millions upon millions believe the Koran as an 
act of faith and duty, though Mahomet, the supposed author, 
never wrote a chapter of that book, prophet of God though he 
claimed to be. Indeed, as a matter of fact, Mahomet could not 
write, and Joe Smith was in the same predicament. 

Excuse the author's presumption in this connection. He 
simply wishes to enquire why he should not be trusted and be- 
lieved in what he states? He is still living and his history and 
standing are easy to be ascertained. He is not a mythical per- 
sonage, and there is no pretence or claim that there is anything 
abnormal or mysterious about him. He is a plain, ordinary 
citizen — just such a man as you might meet if you went out on 



INTRODUCTORY. 



7 



the highway any day. [The author ought not to have men- 
tioned this fact — it is the weak spot in his case. There is noth- 
ing about him to arouse curiosity or excite surprise. He is too 
nonest to be the founder of a new creed. He is too modest al- 
together in his pretensions. He ought to be ready to magnify on 
short notice, and to falsify whenever occasion may seem to re- 
quire. If he could not perform miracles, he ought to pretend 
that he could, and swear to it. If not willing to forge and alter 
documents, he ought at least to be willing to avail himself of the 
services of enthusiasts who might be ready to lend a helping 
hand in that direction]. History gives no account of any re- 
ligion that was ever established on an honest basis. In all cases, 
as history informs us, the end justified the means, and frauds 
and falsifications were at the bottom of all these institutions. 
That was the manner in which success was achieved. People, 
all people, are extravagantly fond of lies, and especially so in all 
cases where there can be no possible doubt that they are lies. 

The author of this book is a man of years, of education, and 
of extensive business experience. He has traveled much, studied 
much, and he knows the ways of men. He feels that he has 
mastered his subject, after fifty years of continued inquiry, and 
he fully believes that he understands what he is writing about. 
But, he is well aware that even this is not sufficient. He lacks 
one thing more, the main thing, and that is, lie is not divine. In 
other words, he is not related to the gods. What makes the 
matter all the worse, he does not even pretend to anything like 
divine descent, nor does he believe in things divine in any 
form. However, he is not going to have any contest or contro- 
versy over this trivial matter. He takes his own medicine at all 
times — whenever he takes any. He wants the privilege of say- 
ing and believing what he pleases ; and he is willing that every- 
body else shall be allowed to do the same thing. He is deter- 
mined to be honest with himself, as well as with those with whom 
he is called upon to deal. He will neither believe a lie, if he 
knows it, nor will he concoct or advance lies for others to be- 
lieve. He relies upon reason, and upon nothing but reason, and 
if people are not content with that, they can read the books of 
some other author. 



The doctrines of this work are quite different in character 
and aim from the doctrines found in the Bible and in other 
oooks which are regarded as authority at the present day. The 
purpose of this author is to induce men to rely upon their judg- 



8 



INTRODUCTORY. 



ment and to lead them forward to the development of their own 
powers both mental and physical. In this way the learner is 
encouraged to make progress upon his own personal responsi- 
bility. This work advocates not freedom for the few, as other 
works do, but freedom for all mankind. Instead of favoring the 
development of classes, ranks, orders and organizations, which 
always imply rulers, the author would, so far as practicable, 
suppress classes and orders of every description. He does not 
believe in one-man power, but in the power that is possessed by 
every man. 

The leading feature in the system advocated and advanced 
in this work is individuality, self-reliance and personal independ- 
ence at all times. Its aim is to inculcate respect for the rights, 
feelings and interests of those with whom we come in contact in 
daily life, while it insists upon a similar recognition of rights, 
feelings and interests by those who belong to the other side. 
It is opposed, under all circumstances, to the use of force as a 
means by which to control or influence the actions of men. It is 
opposed to any course that savors of revenge, or to any step that 
has no other purpose than to cause pain or produce sorrow in 
the hearts of those who in some manner have given us offence, 
or whose conduct we happen to consider criminal or disgraceful. 

Every man ought to be governed in his action by the ordi- 
nary rules of common sense, and yet it is a fact that few men 
can be found whose actions are so governed. People have plenty 
of common sense, but strangely enough, it is about the last guide 
that they care to defer to. Men prefer to follow fashion, custom, 
authority — anything in the world but one's own common sense. 
They have become so accustomed to being governed by others in 
all their movements, following rule and precedent in all cases, 
that they are inclined to do absolutely nothing upon their own 
personal responsibility. Such is the distressing effect of long- 
continued habit ! People do not want to bother themselves with 
self-government, and so they have got into the habit, fatal habit, 
of employing a director or master ! It requires too much labor 
for a man to look after his own affairs, and so he employs an 
agent — another fatal habit. People as a rule do not trouble 
themselves to reflect upon any subject, because inquiry and re- 
flection imply too much exertion. Men defer to others, to their 
superiors, in all things! That is the reason why there are so 
many flunkeys in this world, and so few men that are really 
manly and self-reliant. 

No man should follow rules and customs merely because 
they happen to be recognized as rules and customs. Every man 
should do what he believes ought to be done, and at the same 



INTRODUCTORY. 



9 



time he should leave undone what he feels should not be done. 
Rules always hamper and embarrass those who make an effort to 
observe them. Their effect is enfeebling, and instead of aiding 
reason, they have a tendency to supersede it. There is no in- 
stance in a man's life in which he could safely dispense with 
reason. No man can accomplish any great results, nor can he 
attain to any important achievement, by simply following rules 
laid down by either himself or others. Rules are as apt to lead 
a man in the wrong direction as in the right one. A rule that is 
good for one man may not be good for another ; a rule that is 
good for one place or one time is not necessarily good for every 
other place or every other time. An inflexible rule or law — and 
a true rule is always inflexible — is not a safe guide for any man to 
follow. To be able do his best, a man must be free in his action. 
But a man who follows rules or laws can never be said to be free 
in his movements. Rules in grammar, rules in speaking, rules 
in writing, rules in art, rules in music, always embarrass the per- 
former. The only rules that are worth noticing are those which 
each man makes for himself — and in that case they are principles 
rather than rules. The best way for the true artist is to follow 
his own feelings, his judgment, his sense of propriety at all 
times. If a person does not know anything, it might be neces- 
sary, and therefore proper, to follow rules. The Orientalists 
followed rules in their art, in architecture especially, and what 
is the result ? Simply a most disagreeable stiffness and affecta- 
tion, and an absence of naturalness, in all the forms and figures 
which we find presented in that part of the world. 



In this connection it may not be improper to consider the 
subject of " Other people's opinions." Opinions are things that 
are exceedingly common, and they are being offered freely to 
everybody at all times. And what is curious is the fact that 
those who do not know what they are talking about, give their 
opinions quite as freely and with as much assurance as those 
who do know. It is natural for every one to consider that his 
own opinions are infallible ; and the author of this work con- 
fesses his own weakness in the same direction. However, he 
really believes that he never presumes to give opinions on sub- 
jects to which he has given no attention. It is not a ba'd idea 
at all for a man to have confidence in his opinions ; a man's 
whole life is governed entirely by opinions, arrd what he thinks 
and believes is indeed all there is of him. 

As to the opinion which other people hold in regard to the 
writings of this author, the matter has never given him any 



10 



INTRODUCTORY. 



serious concern. People are quite welcome to what they think. 
Thoughts prove nothing, especially when the criticisms offered 
apply to matters of which the critics themselves have no very 
intimate knowledge. Even a very wise man may know very 
little about some things. And on subjects on which wise men 
are ignorant, what would their opinions be worth more than that 
of the commonest simpleton ? The wisdom of no man ever ex- 
tends farther than to a few things. It must be remembered 
that any man's opinion is merely what he believes. And what 
should we care what some other man believes? As we have 
said before, belief proves nothing, even if it happens to be en- 
dorsed by a million, or even ten millions of people. No doc- 
trine has ever yet been promulgated so absurd that it did not 
have many believers. Indeed, as a rule, the more absurd a 
doctrine is, the more rapidly it will spread and the more con- 
verts will be found. 

A man who is a student and who thinks for himself ought to 
know, and what he knows ought to go farther, at least with 
himself, than what some one else happens to believe, either one 
way or the other. "What a man knows ought to give him con- 
fidence and assurance ; and the adverse opinions of those who 
refuse to believe what he teaches ought to occasion him no very 
great annoyance. 

The author feels very thankful that he has lived to see the 
time when he is not troubled in the slightest degree over what is 
said or thought about the doctrines he advances. As said be- 
fore, what psople think or say is no proof in this connection, 
and so it is to be passed by as if it had no value. Even if people 
should praise the writer, he would be led to believe that there 
must ba some mistake about the business. Plenty of people re- 
ceive praise that they do not deserve ; and on the contrary, many 
men are condemned for crimes or offences that they never 
thought of committing. When people praise or blame us, they 
merely say what they happen to think — sometimes in their ignor- 
ance, sometimes out of prejudice, and sometimes out of seif- 
interest — to none of which do we ever refer as a source of re- 
liable truth. 

This author has no fear or dread of public opinion on ques- 
tions of this kind. It is only the conscience-stricken, the timid, 
or the helpless that are ever worried over "what people think." 
Let people go where they please and say aad think what they 
choose. If the people are in the wrong, as they usually are on 
questions of this character, the blame certainly cannot be thrown 
upon the author of this work. The misfortune is to be referred 
back wholly to themselves. The author has always been able 



INTRODUCTORY. 



11 



to take care of himself thus far, and he feels confident that he 
can do so a while longer. He has never coveted the money of 
the public, nor hankered after either their affections or applause. 
From his youth up, he has made it his practice to speak the truth 
and pay his own bills. He knows very well that he is not, by 
so doing, traveling the road that leads directly to success, but he 
began to follow the other route a long time ago, and it is rather 
too late to change at this the closing stage in his career. 

The author has learned late in life, to his regret, that to be 
eminently successful in any undertaking, a man must be able to 
lie deliberately, and at short intervals. It is also desirable for 
him, so far as practicable, to have other people pay his debts, for 
it will be found quite inconvenient generally for a man to pay 
his own bills. There are other roads leading to success, it is 
true, but the route just indicated is the shortest by far and it i's 
the one usually traveled. Success in any department depends 
largely upon arts and artifices, and upon tricks dextrously per- 
formed by somebody. 

The author confesses that he finds great consolation in not 
wanting anything from anybody, or rather in not being de- 
pendent upon anybody for anything. He is*not even anxious to 
sell his books, which is something so completely out of the usual 
order of things that people wonder at the phenomenon greatly. 
He does not even want position or thanks as a compensation for 
what he has said or done. He has never been concerned about 
any such trifles as these. He wants neither grace nor pardon, 
and he has never had any occasion to ask for favors of that kind 
from any source. As for rank, privileges and promotion, he 
hates the names. He wants no borrowed livery and no gratui- 
ties from anybody; at his time of life, he would not know what 
to do with trinkets like these if they were offered to him. 

So far as the author's life and conduct are concerned, he does 
not feel that there is in either anything of which he should be 
either proud or ashamed. There are plenty of others who are 
richer, wiser and perhaps happier than himself, but that proves 
nothing as to the merits of the case. Of his lot in life, he does 
not complain, and most certainly others should not. He calls no 
man master, and he recognizes no being as sovereign. One 
stronger than himself might beat him, but he could not subdue 
him. He might burn and even tear his flesh, but his spirit, his 
thoughts, his will would remain unaffected, and he would go on 
believing as before. The spirit of man is quite beyond the reach 
of any agency either human or divine. 

So far as the public is concerned, the writer is resolved that 
he will not go to the hill— there is no law that compels him to 



12 



INTRODUCTORY. 



do so. Let the hill remain where it is, and let it continue to be a 
hill indefinitely. As a matter of fact, the public is no better 
than other folks, and sometimes not quite so good. It is not a 
wise thing to be too deferential to anybody, and especially to the 
public. The tendency of extreme deference is to natter people 
and give them too high an opinion of themselves. Deference 
has done more to spoil mankind than any other known agency. 
It has made potentates imperious and led judges to believe them- 
selves infallible. The true course is neither to dictate terms to 
others nor to obey commands that come from those who arrogate 
to themselves an authority which they never rightfully possessed. 
Mahomet made a mistake in trying to do what proved to be 
impossible. 



Naturally enough when an author, after long continued 
efforts, has discovered truths which he knows are of importance 
to the world, he would expect encouragement and assistance 
from the learned classes, and especially from the press of the 
country, but if such be his hopes, he is quite certain to find him- 
self disappointed at last. New truths are recognized by the 
world very grudgingly. If new truths should be introduced and 
accepted, the old and antiquated truths in vogue would neces- 
sarily be discarded, and such a result would affect unfavorably 
a host of institutions that are based upon old doctrines. New 
truths, in their progress, have everything to contend with, and 
their ( development is uniformly slow and uncertain. The old 
and the new cannot occupy common ground. Hence arises the 
the opposition and the resistance which the new is certain to 
encounter. 

It is a striking truth, of which history gives us abundant 
evidence, that the educated classes are slow to accept new views 
at any time. They resist the truth and are unwilling to be con- 
vinced — imagining, as they do, that they know already quite all 
that is vouchsafed to man to know. They are averse to receiving 
instruction, and they seem to regard those who come forward 
with new thoughts as trying to encroach upon their preserves. 
It will be remembered that the original followers of Christ were 
not philosophers or scholars, but fishermen and simple-minded 
women of not a very high order. Mahomet's first convert was 
his first wife, and his success in this direction was so satisfactory 
that he kept on adding to the number of his wives until fifteen 
had been accepted. No, it is indeed asking too much to have 
the learned accept new doctrines, no matter how well founded, 



INTRODUCTORY. 



13 



when their heads are already filled with false notions that they 
have been accumulating for a lifetime. 

What should we expect, and where should we hope to find 
individuality and independence in a country where everything is 
bought for a price, and where the servant must obey his master 
or surrender his means of subsistence ? How could any man be 
expected to be a free man, or a true man, under such circum- 
stances ? How could he preach or teach, or even edit, successfully 
and satisfactorily, when not only his body but his soul belongs 
practically to some other person ? In a state of bondage, literal 
or otherwise, individuality is dishonored, discounted, disre- 
garded. In a state of bondage, individual development is ar- 
rested ; or rather it ceases to exist. Where there are masters, 
slaves do not count ; and if a slave happens to do anything, the 
credit uniformly goes to the master to whom the slave properly 
belongs. The same is true of employees — they never count. 
They perform a certain amount of labor and they are paid ac- 
cording to custom or contract. What they produce is not theirs, 
but their master's. 

This is the legitimate, the inevitable, result of our wage 
system, or rather of our master and servant system. It is the 
same everywhere and in all departments where people are com- 
pelled to work for a living, or where money is looked upon as 
the chief end of man's existence. It is the same in the church, 
in schools and in business life generally. It is the same in war. 
To read history, a person would suppose that the general was the 
only effective man in the army. Certainly, he receives all the 
credit and claims all the praise. Speaking of the naval battle near 
Santiago a few years since, no one refers to what the gunners, or 
the seamen, or even the captains did. The sole question thus 
far discussed, is whether it was Sampson or Schley that destroyed 
the Spanish fleet. 

But subserviency is by no means confined to servants or em- 
ployees. No man is more subservient than the newspaper pro- 
prietor, who keeps his eye turned constantly in the direction of 
the weather vane. Nothing interests him so much as to ascer- 
tain which way the wind blows. He ought to lead, and, to a 
certain extent, control public opinion, but instead of that he con- 
tents himself with the humble position of a purveyor. There is 
money in such a course, but is that all that a man must live for ? 
As a matter of fact the press of the country is spoiling its patrons 
by excessive indulgence and by a too ready submission to their 
whims and freaks. The press is too timid altogether in the 
matter of telling unpleasant but wholesome truths. A truth 
may be unpleasant and still be the very medicine that the public 



14 



INTRODUCTORY. 



needs. The press ought to be in advance of the times on all the 
vital questions which affect the welfare of mankind, but instead 
of that it is too modest, too diffident, too apprehensive, to ad- 
vocate, or even to introduce, what might lead to dissent or ob- 
jection on the part of its readers. It is so much easier and more 
pleasant to drift down the stream than to endeavor to turn it in 
some new direction. The press ought to be on the radical side, 
while as a matter of fact it is uniformly on the conservative side, 
especially in its treatment of grave social questions. The press 
sometimes criticises, but always in the mildest and most respect- 
ful manner possible. The infallibility of the state and the in- 
fallibility of the church are two dogmas that are defended as 
ably, as persistently, and perhaps as fanatically, by the press as 
they are by the clergy. If the press does not happen to have 
piety, it affects it, and as to its patriotism, it is usually of such a 
highly demonstrative character that no one would think of 
doubting its genuineness for a moment. The press, with rare 
exceptions, favors wars for conquest. It encourages charity ex- 
penditures ; and it also favors a liberal education, with all that 
term implies at the present day. Indeed, as already intimated, 
the press will generally be found to be partial to the popular side 
of all popular questions. To be unpopular, in the newspaper 
business, is simply to lose money. Hence unpleasant discussions 
are generally avoided. We would much sooner expect to find 
heresy in the pulpit than in the public press. Even advanced 
thought is generally supposed to be out of place in an ordinary 
public journal. 

The trouble with the thinkers of this country, what few we 
have, is that they think a little in one direction and a little in 
another, but they pursue nothing to its legitimate consequences. 
They arrive at nothing complete, nothing final. They keep close 
to the shore and seem to have a horror of deep water. They are 
pagans on some points, Christians on others, and quite advanced 
and radical thinkers on other questions. There is no plan, no 
system and no uniformity in their methods of investigation. 
This is so all over this country, and it is so throughout the world. 



A 

REVIEW IN BRIEF 

OF 

THE LEADING DOCTRINES 

EN 

THE NEW CREED. 



The people at large are generally better than their laws, 
better than the creeds which they profess to accept. Our people 
to-day are much better than their Bible, and if 
C and S ^ ie ^ were following the teachings of that 

Constitutions book, we should have a most unhappy and un- 
fortunate world indeed. As a rule people never 
follow the creed that they pretend to follow, and the reason is 
that people grow and progress, while creeds remain unchanged 
for an indefinite time. Creeds and laws are entirely wanting in 
elasticity, and that is their fatal defect. They are never adapted 
9 to any particular time except the present moment. This fact is 
well exemplified in the constitution of the United States. A 
hundred years ago, it expressed the sentiments of the people of 
this country, and it was fairly well adapted to their wants at 
that period. But at present, and for a long time past, it is and 
has been a sad misfit. Men want and need a new creed, as the 
people of the United States want and need a new constitution. 
What people thought and believed a hundred or a thousand years 
ago they could not possibly think and believe to-day. Hence 
the need of a change, a radical and complete change. No matter 
what people as a body profess, nor what line of policy they pur- 
sue in practice, they will be found at heart to be honest and true, 
and uniformly on the side of fair play. If people could only get 
rid of their prejudices and false impressions, their conduct in 
life would be greatly improved. 



16 



LEADING DOCTRINES. 



When a man starts out at the opening of his career, loaded 
down, as he usually is, with whims and false notions of all kinds, 

he reminds one of Santa Claus just ready t© go 
Living down the chimney with his customary stock of 

toys for Christmas. Every one of these false no- 
tions is worthless for practical purposes, and the sooner the pos- 
sessor gets rid of them, the smoother and safer will be his prog- 
ress in after life. A man must cease to believe in the provi- 
dence of God, and he must banish from his mind all such ideas 
as those of necessity and destiny. To calculate upon Providence, 
is to depend upon something that is not even known to have an 
existence ; and as to the question of fate, things may be pre- 
destined, and they may not ; they may be necessary and they 
may not ; but since we never know what is destined or necessary 
and what is not, we must proceed through life without any re- 
gard to such conceptions as these. Moreover, let us cease to 
talk about original sin, or sin of any kind, for at best such talk is 
unprofitable. All the sin there is or ever has been in this world 
is to be found exclusively in the minds of men. 

There is very little, if any, true merit in this world. There 
is no merit in any man's doing his duty. That is something that 
every man ought to do. But to do what we need 
True n0 £ (Jq^ an( j £ (j j£ because we wish, that perhaps 
x ' is meritorious. There is no merit in obeying the 
law ; none in obeying some master, some despot. There is none 
in observing our contracts, and none in behaving as we ought. 
That is something that may be expected from every man. 

The only charity that is true and worthy, is charity for all, 
charity for every one without distinction, and not for a few 
favorites. And the same is true of love, justice, 
fairness. If we select as favorites those only that 
please us, that is clearly selfish, and there can be no merit in a 
selfish course. The only real charity is when bread is cast upon 
the waters where all can share alike, or when at least all have 
equal opportunities. 

You cannot change the character of an act by any process 

after it is done. It cannot be excused, palliated, justified or 

compensated for by doing some other act, no 

No Change matter how meritorious. One act has nothing 
or 

Compensation. to ^° w ^ n another act, and it has no connection 
with it in any manner. No man or set of men 
can take away the rights of another man — they cannot deprive 



LEADING DOCTRINES. 



17 



him of his manhood or citizenship or of his rights to either of 
those things. One man is as good as any other man, and he 
has as many rights and privileges under all circumstances. 



The Bible doctrine is : "Do this, and you shall be re- 
warded." This is indeed a strange proposition ! Not, do this 

because it is right or necessary, but do this and 
Rewards y QU s h a n have your pay for it ! And if you re- 
Punishments f use > y° u shall be punished — that is, you not only 

lose your reward, but you will be punished in the 
bargain ! A person would suppose that these two leading mo- 
tives, fear and hope, so forcibly set forth in the Bible, would 
keep everybody in the straight and narrow way, but it is well 
known that they do not. And why not ? Because people learned 
a long time since that threats and promises cannot be depended 
on. In nine cases out of ten, they fail to materialize — some men 
escape the punishment they deserve and others fail to secure the 
reward that was promised. There could not be a worse system 
of government than one based on threats and promises. It al- 
ways has failed, it fails to-day, and it always will tail. As a 
matter of fact, people cannot be controlled by other people in 
their doings — they can only be controlled by themselves. 



All our wickedness and brutality, we venture to affirm, 
comes directly from our fear of the Lord and dread of punish- 
ment. People who are obliged to suffer are never 

^^orV 116 S ° hapP ^ aS wnen * ne y see others suffer. This 
suffering constitutes a bond of sympathy between 
men. People who suffer punishment delight in seeing others 
have a dose of the same medicine. If a man happens to catch 
the small-pox, he feels easier when he ascertains that some one 
else has the same disease. This removes the feeling of loneliness 
that a man would experience if he found that he alone was 
down with the small-pox. There is no mistake about the matter, 
misery does like company. 



Compensation or threats have nothing to do with real good- 
ness. What a man is hired to do is the service of a slave, and 
what a man is compelled or forced to do by threats 
ompen . . g ^ e work of a slave and it can have no merit. 
But it should be borne in mind that all the virtue, morality or 
goodness that is considered or contemplated in the Bible is an 
interested goodness or morality. It is bought for a consideration, 
or it is the result of fear. 



18 



LEADING DOCTRINES. 



We are told that we must do good. But what is good? That 
is the whole question. Is it what you say, or what we say? We 

t is Good? arG ^° De ^ eve w hat i s true, but how do we 

know what is true, whether we believe it or not? 
How shall we be enabled to know? We never can know, and 
so we must keep on groping in the dark. 

We torture and punish people, not in self-defence, not to 
protect ourselves, but to make them do as we want them to do, 

and above all to have them adopt our creed and 
Self -Defence, follow our mode of life. But are we any better 

in this respect than they who lived in the Middle 
Ages? Did they do any worse than we are doing every day? 
Were they more wicked or more merciless than we are ? No, 
all our punishments are pure torture, and the spirit that prompts 
this persecution is the contemptible and villainous spirit that 
moved those who lived and ruled in Europe from the 5th to the 
15th centuries. Men want to be masters, they want their own 
way, they want to exercise power, and they delight in being cruel 
to unbelievers at all times. 

Some people imagine that it is a great misfortune to lose a 
little money, or perhaps some patronage. But men should be- 
come accustomed to such things. If we have 

Loss of gains, we must have losses — that is inevitable, and 

Character 

we should keep ourselves prepared for such re- 
sults. But to lose character and independence, — that is quite an- 
other matter. Such a loss is irreparable. 

Wonderful is the influence of a good example. It is far 
healthier in its results than dogmas or ordinary instruction. 

Christ's influence upon the world was not in what 
Example * ie sa ^' in wn &t he did. There is very little 
power in mere words — perhaps none at all. A law 
may be spread upon the statute book ever so elaborately, but it 
never amounts to anything until something is done with the law 
or it is put into execution. 

Eevenge ! What a silly, senseless and savage thing revenge 
is ! No, turn your back upon your enemy and let him pass on. 

If you take any pleasure in seeing him suffer, only 
wait. You are sure to be gratified, in the natural 
course of things, if you will only have patience and wait. 



No one thinks of enforcing moral laws, or religious laws. 



LEADING DOCTRINES. 



19 



Why should we punish a man for disobedience to human ordi- 
j L nances and statute laws, which are merely expres- 

sions of the will of certain individuals? We do 
not pretend to enforce ordinances because they are right, but 
because they are law. 

Public opinion ! There is no public opinion. There is the 
opinion of this man and of that man, or of one hundred men. 

Public O inion "^ Ut * s a ver y different thing from the opinion 
of the public as a whole, which really has no 
opinion. 

We might call a thing by a thousand different names, since 
it has a thousand different features in its make-up, or a thousand 

Names different points of view from which observations 
might be taken. There are also a thousand dif- 
ferent directions from which we might reach an object, and each 
one of these directions would be as correct and proper as any of 
the others. We take pictures of things only from our point of 
view. We never present the whole of an object ; at best we 
render only a small portion of it, and that very imperfectly. So 
when we name an object, we do so from some one feature that 
has especially attracted our attention. But we might with equal 
propriety call it by a hundred or a thousand other names. It 
must not be forgotten that any one view or any one characteriza- 
tion of an object is as true and proper as any other. Every ob- 
ject or creature has one special mark or characteristic by which 
it is known, as a hawk by its bill, the lion by its jaws, the camel 
by its neck. Such marks as these were used in the hieroglyphics 
of Egypt to represent objects. 

Sick people live long because they are always nursing them- 
selves ; while strong people, being too confident of their powers, 
take dangerous risks and suffer the consequences. 

Can you change a person ? If you could, you would destroy 
him, for he himself would cease to exist after the change. A 
man is himself only so long as he remains what he was. 

The way to conquer this world is to be above the world and 
have nothing to do with it — to be independent of it, to want none 
of its wares and seek none of its favors. Who 
Conquer. cares for the love of men, or even their approba- 
tion? What does love or approbation amount to 
in the end, and how much value can you attach to it ? If we 



20 



LEADING DOCTRINES. 



were loved alone and continuously, the case would be different. 
Love is a cheap, a very cheap article, and everybody is loved 
a little, some more and some less. But nobody is loved for all 
time ; the favorite of to-day is sure to be neglected and discarded 
for the favorite of to-morrow. Consider the fate of the generals 
of our armies and the commanders of our navies — lauded to the 
skies one day, and hurled down in disgrace the next ! Talk 
about love ! What is so cruel, so exacting, so unmerciful, so 
deceitful, so treacherous as the feeling that we dignify with the 
name of love ? Who would die for glory, for praise, for renown? 
Who would even live for it? Seen in its true light, all glory is 
despicable. What is glory based on ? At best on an accident, 
and generally on falsehood or deception — always at the expense 
of others, and usually through their misfortunes. That some 
may rise, others must fall ; that some may triumph, others must 
be conquered ; that some may rejoice, others must suffer. That 
is an immutable law. Nothing is so ephemeral and so unsatisfac- 
tory as love, approbation and renown, and a sensible man will 
not allow himself to be deceived for one moment by anything so 
fanciful. 



What is truth ? Are there spooks ? There are if you think 
so. Are there witches ? There were for hundreds of years, and 

What is tnere are stn l' f° r those who believe in witches. 
Truth * s ^ iere a devil and a hell and brimstone for bad 
people? Undoubtedly there is, for those who be- 
lieve in such existences as these. The only things in the world 
for us are the things we believe in. If we do not believe in 
them, they do not exist for us. So the question whether Samp- 
son or Schley or Long or McKinley fought the battle of Santiago 
depends entirely upon how you look at the matter. Things look 
different according to the side you look at and the point from 
which the view is taken. Very much — more than is generally 
suspected — depends upon the feelings of the observer. What 
Long's or Sampson's friends or Schley's friends have to say on this 
matter settles nothing. 

It is easy to foretell the future, if one only knows how. 
Nothing is more certain than the future, if you only know the 
F tell elements that enter into the problem. Nature is 
the Future regular and reliable, to a certain extent, in all her 
doings. If it were not so, we could make no calcu- 
lations and no provisions for the future, and such a thing as 
gaining a livelihood would be impossible. We learn to know 
that if we do certain things, certain other things will follow. 



LEADING DOCTRINES. 



21 



The more that we think, the more that we learn, and the better 
that we understand things, the better shall we be able to deter- 
mine what will take place in future. We observe the motions . 
and courses of the stars, and we can determine how and where 
they will be a thousand years hence. 



Be honest with everybody, and especially with yourself. 
Don't try and deceive yourself with fictions and false notions, 
Be Hone t w ^ n hopes, false credits, and praises unde- 

& ' served. Remember that there is nobody in all this 
world that is any better than he ought to be, or that is much 
better than his neighbor, when all things are viewed in a fair 
light. 



Probably nine-tenths of all the worst crimes — robberies, 
murder and arson especially — go unpunished, because the crimi- 
Crimes na * * S neTer detected. And still, absurdly enough, 
Unpunished. people believe that we could not get along with- 
out punishing crime as we do ! If we let nine- 
tenths of our worst criminals escape, what harm would there 
be if we let the other tenth escape, at least with a light punish- 
ment? We might resist evil, but we should not punish evil- 
doers. We should not contend with them. 



It is a remarkable fact that now, four hundred years since 
the close of the period known as the Middle Ages, we are still 
A Remarkable ^ vin & un der Middle Age laws and usages, wor- 

Fact shiping a Middle Age God, in a quiet and formal 
way, and pretending to adopt the doctrines, dog- 
mas and conceptions of the Middle Age Bible. We are trying 
to make these strange doctrines harmonize with the culture and 
progress of the present day, and naturally enough we are meet- 
ing with some difficulties and embarrassments as we proceed. 



What may have been the needs or demands of the past does 
not materially concern us at the present day. The problem 
_ to which we should apply ourselves is the problem 

TllG PrGSGIlt 

Not the Past! of to-day. What is the wise and sensible thing to 
do to-day ? That is. the question, and almost the 
sole question for us now to consider. Let us not allow ourselves 
to be governed by the dead — by the past, by Bibles, by ancestors, 
by tradition, by customs, by laws, by constitutions. Let us have 
a regard for the living, and if we are to be governed at all, let it 
be by masters and principles that belong to the present. 



23 



LEADING DOCTRINES. 



What is heresy? Who is a heretic ? Every man who has a 
new idea, every man who resolves to think on his own account 
What is * S a k ere ^ c * Every man is a heretic for all those 
Heresy ? with whom he happens to differ. Why is a heretic 
such a bad man for some people ? Simply because 
he has an opinion — in other words because he does not happen to 
think as they do. That is the whole of his offending. 

If men will sit down and put themselves in a receptive atti- 
tude, all things shall be revealed unto them. New thoughts and 

knowledge are not the exclusive property of any 
How to Get b ' * 11 i - / 

Knowledge. one man * Knowledge belongs to all mankind. 

Some see farther and see earlier than others, but 
all might see if they only would. Revelation always follows 
meditation ; one man is as much inspired as another, if he only 
makes use of the faculties that nature has given him. 

Perhaps there is no such thing as wrong after all. There 
certainly cannot be any such thing as a real wrong, if we admit 
What is ^ e P revanm & doctrine of excuses and justifica- 
Wrong? tions for wrongs. Some excuse, some palliation 
can be offered for any wrong. Why should we 
accept excuses in one case and reject them in others ? Excuses 
seem to be variable ; one excuse answers for one man and an- 
other for another man. It is just as you look at the matter, both 
in regard to the excuse and in regard to the wrong. Again, we 
say, perhaps there is no such thing as wrong after all. There 
certainly cannot be, if there are excuses for wrongs. We have 
either done wrong or we have not done wrong. If we have not, 
there is no need of any excuse or any justification. Or if we 
really have done wrong, how could excuses or justifications help 
the matter? Excuses are in all cases merely the invention of 
the Devil, and justification can hardly be said to have a worthier 
origin than excuses. 

We shall not take bad men so seriously, when we come to 

realize that all men are somewhat bad, as all men are some- 

„„ . ', what good — bad in one way and good in another. 
What is Bad? w , & . ■ . J ° _ 

Why should we desire to punish bad men — those 

whom we call bad men — when we know that we are as bad as 

they are? We excuse insane men for their bad acts. But all 

men are insane — it is only a question of more or less at best. 

Some men have their insane impulses under better control than 

others — that is all. 



LEADING DOCTRINES. 



2:3 



No man should give commands ; no one has any authority to 
give commands, nor has he any rightful power to enforce them 

after they are given. Commands imply rights and 
Commands. . , , , , 

privileges that were never possessed by any hu- 
man being. No human being ever had any power over his fellow 
men beyond that conceded to him by pusillanimous and indolent 
men who are willing to be slaves and therefore recognize some 
man as their master. No man is ever a king until he is recog- 
nized as king, anointed and crowned as king. The people make 
their kings ; no man ever made himself king. Those who read 
the Bible will notice that God himself was constantly clamoring 
for recognition, obedience, sacrifice, worship. The children of 
Israel did not do as God pleased, but as they themselves pleased. 
That is the way that people always do. No man can be obligated ex- 
cept by his own act— and even then it is impossible. We have 
no right to take advantage of other people's follies and mistakes. 

What should a man do to be saved? To this question our 
answer would be : Work. If any one is to be saved at last, he 
Salvation ma ^ ^ e certam that ft wn l De accomplished by his 
own unaided exertions. All help that is forced 
upon him in that connection will prove a damage to him in the 
end. Work makes a man strong, and it is the only thing that 
will strengthen him. Individuality, self-reliance, coupled with 
untiring effort, is the key to the whole situation. Indeed, a 
man's salvation in the proper sense of the term, is a matter of 
secondary importance. If he does his work well and proceeds 
cautiously and judiciously in all his movements, salvation will 
follow as a matter of course. The only salvation that is worth 
having is that which a man obtains by his own labor and fore- 
thought. Salvation by grace, by election, by favoritism, is not 
the salvation that is calculated to result in much good to hu- 
manity. A man that is a true and noble man disdains to accept 
what he himself has not fairly earned. 

No general rule or law can be laid down that will meet all 
cases justly. What is proper at one time and in one place, 
No General woul( * <l u ft e improper at another time and in 
Rule another place. If a man lived alone, there would 
be no need of a code of any kind to govern his ac- 
tions. But as it is, man is associated with others, and he must 
measure his movements to a large extent by what he understands 
to be public sentiment. Properly speaking, he is under no obliga- 
tions to others and he need not call any man master. What he 
needs to do, and all that he needs to do, is what his best interests 



24 LEADING DOCTRINES. 

require ; and his best interests require that he should be at peace 
with his neighbors and have at all times a wholesome regard for 
their feelings and wishes. A man who does not meet these condi- 
tions should pass for either a madman or a fool. The community 
should not undertake to exercise control over any one of its 
number, except so far as they, the community, may suffer harm 
from his mistakes or misdoings. Beyond that limit, no com- 
munity has anything to say or do about what course any man or 
woman may choose to pursue. 

How should a man conduct himself? What course should 

he pursue? In all things and at all times he should conduct 

himself like a sensible and just man. Anything 
What is Right? , , 

is right that a man does, provided he does not 

injure or offend some other man. 

Might confers no right upon any man ; to confer a right or 
to give power does not come within the province of any indi- 
vidual. Nothing guarantees rights or privileges 
Might is ° ., . -. , 

Never Right m an ^ case — nei ther merit nor wisdom have any 
power in that direction. 

Under all conditions and all circumstances, one man or one 
woman, or one child, is as good as another — possesses equal 

« „ rights and is entitled to equal privileges. Noth- 
One as (rood . „ . .. ° , x _ 

as Another. m £ can confer privileges upon any one, and noth- 
ing can destroy them. Ranks, orders, classes or 
conditions in life should not be recognized. 

Nothing can excuse or justify a wrong — for if it is excusable 

or justifiable, it is not a wrong. Even good intentions or worthy 

motives make no difference with the merits of the 
No Excuse . . , _ , , , , 

for Wrong case - A man is responsible for what he does, even 

though he is not responsible for his motives. A 
man is never really to blame for what he does, for at all times he 
is supposed to do what appears to him perfectly right and justifi- 
able under the circumstances. 

There is absolutely no remedy for a wrong after it is com- 
mitted. No balm in Gilead can afford the slightest relief in such 
a case. If a man suffers harm, there can be no 
No Remedy. ac £ ua j com p ensa tioii for the damage occasioned. 
What shall balance a life lost, or even the loss of a limb? 
Property stolen may be restored, but even that does not change 
the character of the original offence. If a man robs, nothing 



LEADING DOCTRINES. 



2.-) 



that he can afterward do can palliate the crime or obliterate the 
reproach. Hence it is that all punishments, after the crime is 
committed, are senseless and even unjust. They afford no 
remedy ; there is no pretence that they render any real service 
to any one. Every punishment is purely an act of revenge, and 
nothing less. Viewed in its true light, punishment, no matter 
how or by whom inflicted, is brutal and savage. 

Men have no rights, no privileges, no duties — because they 
have no masters who are qualified to enforce these rights and 
duties. Only those who are servants can have 
No Rights. c ] u t;j es • only those who are masters can have 
privileges, or even rights. Slaves have no rights; they have 
only duties. 

Should men always tell the truth ? What right has any man 
to demand the truth from us at any time ? We owe him nothing. 

We are under no obligations to any one. If we 
No Obligations, were, we should be slaves. Slaves alone have ob- 
ligations. We may tell a man the truth, or not, 
as we please. We may even decline to answer him at all. So- 
ciety might institute a custom on this matter which no doubt it 
would be wise for us to observe — not because society has any 
right to make any demands upon us, but because we find it to 
our best interests not to antagonize those with whom we are 
associated. 



No man should make contracts, because contracts bind and 
hamper him, and they force him often to do things that he does 

Co tracts w * sn *° ^ na * w © should always 

follow is not a past or defunct will, but our will at 
the present moment. But in contracts a man is compelled to 
obey an old and extinct will. What we willed yesterday has no 
connection with what we will to-day. Our will of yesterday is 
another man's will, not ours. 

Nothing is really right, and nothing is really wrong ; noth- 
ing is really good or really bad — only as we consider that it is so, 
Right and De li eve it to be so. If people could only change 
Wrong their belief, black to them would appear white, 
and things old would appear new once more. All 
the qualities of objects that attract our notice or affect us in any 
way have their seat in our feelings or in our perceptions. What 
is high for one man is low for another ; what is green to one man 
is blue to another, and plenty of people perceive no color where 



26 



LEADING DOCTRINES. 



color exists in abundance. Two extremes are always the end of 
one and the same line, and there is no mark to separate them. 
There is no actual difference between goodness and badness, or 
largeness and smallness, or strength and weakness, or between 
heat and cold. No one could tell where one begins and the other 
ends. In all cases the difference is one of degree. Things are 
for us merely what we think they are, and their qualities depend 
upon the standard with which we compare them. A man of 
moderate height is a giant when compared to a pigmy. A day 
that is hot for some people is cold for others. 

Why should we condemn a man because he is more wicked 
than we are, or because we imagine he is so ? He is wicked in 

Judge X t ° ne ^ n ' ec ^ on wn ^ e we are wicked in another. 

The lowest criminal has not a single quality or 
characteristic that we do not also possess. If he steals, is it not 
a fact that we have similar propensities, though perhaps under 
better control ? We curb our passions while criminals do not, or 
perhaps cannot. It is absence of temptation, in many cases, that 
makes some better than others. No man knows what he might 
do if he were driven by want. Circumstances change, as well as 
develop, character, and they bring to the surface conditions that 
otherwise would never appear. No man can say truthfully that 
he is better than other men. No man knows what he might do 
until he has been sorely tempted. 



Should men obey the laws and yield to government ? It is 
generally prudent to do so. We must be prepared at all times to 
^ l ? encounter evils, and uniformly to bear them pa- 
tiently. Christ is right in saying : Resist not evil." 
That is, do not combat evil, do not contend with it. As a rule, 
evil is increased by contention and combat. Our governments 
are made stronger by the resistance we offer them. We at least 
give them an excuse for arming and entrenching themselves. 
But while w T e might deem it expedient to submit to laws, we 
would by no means be so far a coward or hypocrite as to com- 
mend them. We would at all proper times do just the opposite. 
No law can deserve commendation, because no law can be just 
and proper. No man or set of men has any right to enforce 
laws ; but without enforcing them they amount to nothing. 
Resistance may indeed become necessary and unavoidable at last 
— that is a course which each man must decide upon for himself 
— but it must be observed that, as a rule, contention never im- 
proves matters. It is rare even that revolutions lead to anything 
more than a change of masters. No lasting improvement will 



LEADING DOCTRINES. 



27 



ever be secured until people's minds are enlightened and their 
hearts become softened in some way. We should respect every 
man's opinions and belief. While we do not agree with him, we 
need not oppose him. We need not even deny the truth of his 
position — that is an open question that may be left unsolved. 
And so we should treat laws, which are only evidences of some- 
body's opinions, or at least of somebody's wishes. They are just 
or unjust according as you view them — and somewhat according 
to your interests and your early education. But one thing should 
always be conceded, namely, that on this question of the pro- 
priety of laws, the judgment of the humblest citizen is worthy of 
as much respect as that of those who made the laws. 

We would not go out of our way to resist or resent wrongs, 
but we would never consent to them. There is a sort of nega- 
Resist "Not ^ive, undemonstrative resistance that is often more 
effective than resistance of a more forcible 
character. If a man takes a firm stand and refuses to get out of 
the way, he is not easily overthrown. As a rule people submit 
too readily, we may even say too cheerfully. Tyrants have a 
wholesome regard for those who meet them boldly and deter- 
minedly on all occasions. Usually people who are trodden upon 
are those who prostrate themselves in the first place. Those who 
do not respect themselves deserve no respect from others. It 
should never be forgotten that there is not force enough in all 
this world to compel a man to surrender, provided he has decided 
that he will not surrender. A man might be badly hurt, or even 
killed, and still not surrender. To surrender is an act of will, 
and the will is something that is not controlled by foreign in- 
fluence. The martyrs did not surrender. They actually tri- 
umphed over their adversaries, even in death. There can be no 
consolation in killing those who simply refuse to believe or dis- 
believe. 

We would not teach that men should love their enemies, any 

more than we would teach people to hate and wrong themselves. 

_ . We might pity, and even despise our enemies, but 
Love Enemies? , , £ . n 

we have never yet progressed so far m social 

science that we should caress our enemies for the injuries they 

had inflicted. However, the very last thing we should think of 

doing would be to strive to injure some one simply because, 

through crazy impulse, he had done something to give us pain 

or cause us injury. If we did so, we should be no better than 

the offender himself. If we treat others kindly, will they not be 

inclined to return similar treatment ? Certain it is, that if we 



28 



LEADING DOCTRINES. 



treat others badly, either with or without occasion, we are offer- 
ing an inducement for them to act in the same manner in their 
conduct toward us. 

It must not be forgotten that we sometimes call enemies by 
the wrong name, and while we regard them as enemies, they 
E . are really our friends and benefactors. The re- 
verse is equally true. We frequently regard peo- 
ple as friends who are not our friends, and who, no matter what 
their motives or purposes may "be, are a source of injury to us 
rather than benefit. We are apt to be too sensitive, too selfish and 
too easily offended. We do not make sufficient allowance for the 
circumstances that control men and actually force them to do as 
they do. A man may harm us, and often does, while in the legit- 
imate pursuit of his own calling. The bird that in endeavoring 
to secure a breakfast takes a few of our cherries, or perhaps some 
hills of corn, is by no means our enemy. Its crime is not robbery ; 
its act is as legitimate as any other act. Are we ourselves not 
perpetually harming some one, both in business and out of busi- 
ness, sometimes unintentionally and sometimes otherwise ? Why, 
we can scarcely turn without danger of treading on somebody's 
toes. If we gain a suit, somebody must lose a suit, if we win a 
victory in any way, somebody must suffer defeat. The general of 
the army rides in triumph over the bodies of the fallen — some- 
times of men of his own army and sometimes of the enemy. 
Nothing is ever gained that does not come, either directly or indi- 
rectly, at the expense of some one else. No, our views of enmity 
need reconsidering, readjusting and reconstructing. As a matter 
of fact, everybody is our enemy and everybody is our friend ; or 
nobody is really our enemy, and nobody is our friend. The 
best of friends will occasionally do us an injury, and the worst 
of enemies, we shall find as we come to know them better, have 
as many virtues as we have ourselves. There is no real evil in 
this life ; neither is there any unalloyed good. Here again, as 
everywhere, the whole question is one of degree. One thing is 
perhaps more of an evil than another thing is — that is all. There 
is nothing that is unqualifiedly bad or unqualifiedly good in all 
this world. No man was ever born who proved himself good 
every day in the week. The best of men have their discouraging 
symptoms, and the worst of men have their pleasing features. 
All men have their moods and times. No man, no thing, has a 
constant, unvarying character. Characters change as the winds 
change. It is never all sunshine with anybody, however much 
he may claim to the contrary. A man who pretends to be al- 
ways good has a poor memory, or he does not know himself in- 



LEADING DOCTRINES. 



20 



timately. We call those people our enemies who encroach upon 
our domain or who interfere in some way with our enjoyments. 
As if we owned some part of this planet ! Really we do not own 
a foot of it. Xobody could encroach upon our preserves if he 
tried, for the fact is that we have no preserves. We are all 
squatters. We call the American Indians our enemies, when the 
truth is that we ourselves are the original offenders. That is a 
way we have of excusing ourselves for the horrible crimes we 
have committed ! We seek to palliate our offences by calling 
our antagonists hard names. This is a bad way, but it is gener- 
ally adopted, especially in Christian countries. 

Would we combat or condemn religion ? Most assuredly we 
would not ; we would condemn and combat nothing. We would 

let it die, as it is dying, a natural death. We could 
Religion' 5 not ' if we wou ^, hasten its final departure and 

dissolution by even a single day. It belongs to 
other days, to another and an older generation. It has achieved 
much for mankind, and in that direction its work has been done 
well. When people did not read, did not think, and did not 
know, they needed a star in the heavens to guide them. They 
needed Bibles and angels and priests and demons to serve them. 
They needed support, encouragement, and direction, and this 
they found in the sacred writings which are embodied in the 
Bible. But everything that comes to the front in this world has 
its mission and its time ; it has its period of birth and develop- 
ment, and finally there comes the last period of death and decay. 
The Bible and the so-called Christian doctrines have reached this 
latter period already. They may, and doubtless will, linger for 
hundreds of years yet, but in a mild and modified form. It is 
hard to decide when anything dies, or even how it dies when it 
does die — in a certain sense, and in a very true sense, it never 
dies. In a certain other, and also true sense, it is always dying. 
When did the Eoman Empire come to an end, and when did the 
Roman people die ? In reality they are not dead, and they will 
never die. They live in those who represent them to-day, in 
their successors, in the effects and influences which they still 
exert upon the world. So it is with the Bible and Christianity, 
and so it is everywhere. Christianity will, properly speaking, 
never die, never cease to have its influence, directly or indirectly, 
upon the history of mankind. In old Bible times people wanted 
miracles ; they wanted to be surprised, amused and deceived. 
They liked fraud better than reality, and if they got the truth, 
they always insisted upon having it in small doses and more or 
less adulterated. In other words, they wanted it watered with 



30 



LEADING DOCTRINES. 



allegory, and in that form the Bible appears to-day. It is mostly, 
if not wholly, allegory. But something will come to take the 
place of our Bible some day — something has come already — some- 
thing that is newer and more in harmony with the spirit of the 
age, something that has the confidence and the cordial endorse- 
ment of intelligent people. So it is and always has been with all 
the things of earth. There is no rest,- no cessation of motion in 
this world. Change is everywhere. Beings are born to die — 
and they die to be born again. In a new and more or less dis- 
guised shape, and with a different work to perform, they con- 
tinue to exist even after they cease to be visible to man. 

We have reached the age of reason — an age such as the 
world has never known before — an age when not only a few men 
Ao-e of Reason *kmk, a ^ man kind think and know and reflect. 

Men have ceased, or to a large extent they are 
ceasing, to trust in Providence, in God, in angels, in masters and 
in medicine-men generally. This is an age of pure individuality, 
an age in which the rights of men are acknowledged at last ; 
an age when it is generally conceded that the work of this world 
is done solely by the individual, and to him the harvest properly 
belongs. In the past, and for all the thousands of years that 
have gone by, the case has been quite different. Until recently 
the individual man was counted as nothing, while the group, the 
tribe, the people, society, government, God, were "the whole 
thing." 

The doctrines taught in this book are for this age, this 
generation. We do not assume that they will be found accept- 

Truth a ^ e ^ 0r a ^ a ^ es to come * Such has certainly not 
been the history of truth thus far — truth has only 
been for a season, and even for a locality. What is truth for us 
is not truth for the heathen, nor for the Mahometans, nor for the 
Hindoos. Truth, so far from being everlasting and universal, is 
strikingly ephemeral, and instead of being for the many, it is 
really for the few. Such truths as are taught in this work are 
surely for the few, because only a few can understand and ap- 
preciate them. Truth is never truth for those who do not and 
cannot understand its realities. Truth is merely what people 
believe — nothing more and nothing less. If nobody believed, we 
should have no truth. People should not be too strenuous on this 
matter of truth. It is not such a constant and unchangeable 
thing as people believe it to be. It is the last thing in the world 
to contend over — people might as well struggle over so many 
square yards of moonshine. They would have nothing after 



LEADING DOCTRINES. 



31 



they had secured it. It is something to teach, something to be- 
lieve, but it is silly to contend for truth, or even for principle. 
It will be remembered that principles, like truths, vary. Every- 
thing is true, and everything is false ; it is at best, as already 
intimated, only true for a little time. Why contend for what will 
disappear to-morrow, or for what will be changed in both form 
and substance to-morrow ? Was there ever a theory or a belief 
that endured for any considerable length of time ? No, with all 
our prating about truth — everlasting truth, as we term it — it 
turns out to be nothing but a bubble after all. Such is truth ! We 
would not fight for it : we would not fight for anything, unless 
it might be for our continued existence, and we are not sure that 
even that is worth any great amount of sacrifice. A man can be 
brave without fighting. Indeed, there is more true bravery in 
peace than in war. Suppose the martyrs had fought, would 
that have made matters any better? Probably not. 

For ages the individual has been sacrificed and slaughtered. 

as if to be sacrificed were his sole purpose in life, his simple 

reason for being. Men submitted to such out- 
Sacrifices 

rageous treatment because they had been taught 
from the beginning that to submit was their simple duty in life. 
What has always been wanted, and what is wanted still, is pa- 
triots, men who will sacrifice themselves to save their country, 
their city, their family, their friends. What a dreadful delusion 
it is that one man ought ever to sacrifice himself to save some 
one else ! As if one man is worth less than another man, or for 
some reason is not so good as another man ! It is a senseless 
delusion to believe in the first place that by sacrificing a man or 
two. or even a million of men, a country, a race, a city could be 
saved. Suffice it to say it is a great blunder to believe thaf 
either men or countries are ever saved by the blood of innocent 
victims. It is a horrible doctrine to teach, that blood is neces- 
sary or serviceable in any case of salvation ! They are knaves 
who teach that the gods are appeased by blood, or that a man 
must be walled up in a building to make sure that the structure 
will never fall. Sacrifices neter sate anybody — they have absolutely 
no remedial value ichatever. Throwing a man overboard never 
saves a sinking ship ; and if a ship could be saved in any such 
way, it would not be worth saving, for it must be a frail affair. 
What saves ships is their inherent strength and their ability to 
breast the storm. The ship sinks not because it carries an extra 
man, but because it is in an unsound condition. Sacrifices never 
saved a people or a city. Athens survived no longer because of 
the death of Socrates. The Roman Empire was not saved by 



32 



LEADING DOCTRINES. 



Christ's crucifixion. The only ones who are benefited by sacri- 
fices are the priests, who divide the spoils between them. Noth- 
ing could be imagined that would be more contemptibly selfish 
than the common practice of sacrificing this man or that man, or 
perhaps a dozen men. merely to protect or perhaps to enrich 
some favorite. There is in itself no virtue or remedy in killing 
men under any circumstances. Men will die fast enough under 
ordinary conditions, without taking steps to hasten their depart- 
ure. Besides, it is wicked to kill men at any time or in any 
manner ; it is wicked to cause pain to any of earth's creatures. 
There can be no excuse for killing men, or even for torturing 
them, and it is a base trick and deception to pretend that such 
cruelties are either useful or necessary. To pass laws to protect 
scoundrels and to excuse their villainies, is a sham that ought 
not to deceive even children and fools — and it seldom does. No 
law can make a wrong right — God himself could not do that much. 



The men who are placed in this world are clearly left to take 
care of themselves. If they are compelled to go into deep water, 
f ^elf ^ ev must either know how to swim or sink 
to the bottom. No angel will ever be at hand to 
save them when danger overtakes them. In their infancy their 
parents, if they are good parents, will do something towards 
their sustenance and protection, but even such friendly offices 
last at best only a few years. Quite early in life every one is 
left to paddle his own canoe, and whether he does or does not 
finally suffer shipwreck, depends wholly upon his own ability 
and exertions. A man must live and learn — that is his sole mis- 
sion in life. How much others may have learned before him, 
or how much others about him may know, is to him a matter of 
very little consequence. The true question is, what does he him- 
self know, and what use does he make of what he does know ? 
This is the important problem for every man to solve. If he be 
wise, he will go promptly to work, and he will apply his energies 
judiciously so far as he moves. He will learn by his own mis- 
takes, and not bother about the mistakes that other people make. 
He will neither pray, nor sacrifice, nor worship, knowing as he 
does that no invisible being can be of any service to him in any 
emergency. If he is finally protected, it will be solely because 
of his own strength and wisdom — there is no other strength or 
wisdom that will avail a man at any time. If he prospers, it 
will be simply because he deserves to prosper — and if he fails, it 
will be because he deserves to fail. The world is ready, and the 
work that needs to be done is ready. Will men meet the de- 
mands of the hour ? Will they do what they know must be done 

2 



LEADING DOCTRINES. 33- 

and should be done ? To succeed in life, men must be ready to 
meet the conditions of their case. People should not sigh and 
pray for assistance and protection — it is a great deal better for 
them to assist and protect themselves. A man should be 
governed in his action by his intellect and his common sense. 
If he has neither at command, he is to be pitied ; indeed, he is 
not made for this world. He will find himself simply a prey to 
designing men, and his life will end in failure. 

There may be, and no doubt there is such a thing as fate or 
luck, but we know not what it is nor how it will be, and so we 
must proceed as if there were no such influence in 
Fate and Luck. ex j s £ ence _ We k now we must die, but the day or 

the year we never know, and so the proper thing to do is to 
proceed as if death did not enter into the problem. 

After we have come to know ourselves, we may come to 
know and understand nature. Nature is always at our service, 

Kno r Nature ^ WG * earn to malie use °f tne opportunities 

offered. Our destiny is to a large extent in our 
own hands, and more so than is commonly supposed. Whether 
we live long or short, depends somewhat upon our inheritance, 
but largely upon our efforts and upon the direction which we 
follow. Whether we live well or ill, depends largely upon our- 
selves. We may read and inquire, we may profit by the experi- 
ence of others, but when we come to the decision at last, we 
must depend wholly upon ourselves. 

Let us not make it our business to complain of this 
world ; let us not be perpetually talking about how bad it is 
N c lit an( ^ °ft en nature fails. As a matter of 

x o omp a n . wor j ( j j s ne ither good nor bad — it is 

what it is, and we are what we are, and let us make the 
best of it. We have, it is true, pain and sickness and dis- 
tress, but these are only one side of the picture. We must, 
it seems, have these things in order to have other things that 
we like better. Things go by doubles. Negatives imply posi- 
tives ; development implies decay, birth implies death ; so 
light implies darkness and pleasure implies pain. Instead of 
constantly putting ourselves in opposition to nature and criticis- 
ing- it, while evidently we cannot change it in the slightest, our 
best course would be to adapt ourselves to its conditions as we 
find them, and this course is open to all men at all times. 



It is astonishing how blind people become at last by being 



34 



LEADING DOCTRINES. 



accustomed to certain wrongs ! For instance, some people do 
Blindness ^" now wna t a murder is when they see it com- 

to Wrong mitted, or when they know that it has been com- 
mitted. Some people think that a man cannot be 
guilty of murder if he acts under the law. But that is a serious 
mistake. The law cannot take away the sin of murder — it can- 
not change the character of the act in the least. When the elec- 
trician sends a man to eternity with 4,700 volts, what is the act 
but murder ? " He is dead," said one of the attendants at a re- 
cent execution. " We will give it to him once more," added the 
electrician coolly ! He wanted to make a sure thing of the job, 
and earn his money. How depressing it is, in this enlightened 
age of ours, to think that a man can be a public executioner and 
still hold up his head when he passes decent people on the street ! 
It was not so in the Dark Ages. 

No matter what a man does, or what he does not do, he can- 
not be deprived of the rights and privileges that belong to men. 
N t D rived ^ man ^ ia ^ * s Dorn a man always remains a man, 
of Rights through all the vicissitudes of life. Every man 
has faults, but he has virtues also — and he usually 
has them in equal measure with other people. How or why 
should we ever judge or condemn a man ? What measure shall 
we apply in order to ascertain the extent of his badness or the 
amount of his goodness? A man's merit does not come from 
what he does but from what he is. So Christ taught. The worst 
culprit has plenty of redeeming qualities, and no more than that 
can be said of the best of men. Even Czolgosz, stolid and stupid 
as he was, said just before his last moment came : "I am sorry 
I could not see my father." Did those who ushered him into 
eternity manifest half as much feeling ? 

It is not well to bother ourselves with things that are mys- 
terious, with things that we do not know, and have no need to 
know, while there are so many things that are at 
Mystery, ^ e same time knowable and useful. 



Is love essential to the good of society and to the prosperity 
of mankind? We should say not. There is no love or charity in 
principle, and no principle in love and charity. 
Principles are general and apply to all indiscrimi- 
nately ; but love and charity are partial in their application and 
are confined to favorites only. Justice knows no distinction of 
persons, but love and charity are matters of favor simply. The 
latter imply choice and selection — choosing some and rejecting 



LEADING DOCTRINES. 



35 



others. No one can love everybody, but people can be just to 
eveiy one. Love is selfish and capricious. It can never be relied 
on. That a man loves us to-day is no guaranty that he will love 
us to-morrow. We must learn to be just and kind to people from 
some other motive than affection or attachment. The world is 
full of good people who are far from being lovable, while those 
that are loved are adored only by the very few. Nothing is 
properly sacred to any one ; or everything is properly sacred to 
every one. One thing is at least as sacred as another. So it is 
with love. People who love everybody in general, love nobody 
in particular — that is, they do not love at all. The love that 
Christians have in view, and which they talk about so enthusi- 
astically, is a selfish love, a partial and particular love, a love for 
one's friends, a love for those whom one likes, with an absolute 
indifference, if not hatred, for those whom one does not like. 
This is Christian love as we find it in practice. Even Christ- 
says : ; 'Love your neighbor." But why not love everybody, 
even those who are not neighbors ? 

How about charity and disinterested benevolence? It is 
doubtful whether such a thing as disinterested benevolence ex- 

Charit istS ' ^ Q aie never cnarrtaD l e to all — that would 
be impossible. At best we are charitable only to a 
few. It is like government protection, which is a species of 
charity — something always for the few at the expense of the 
many. Public or obligatory charity is not charity, properly con- 
sidered. Like everything that is forced or compulsory, it is 
destitute of merit. Again, in practice, charity generally results 
in injury rather than benefit, even to those who are supposed to 
be aided. Charity renders people indolent and helpless. It is 
offering a premium for idleness. There is only one kind of 
gratuitous assistance that does a man any real good, and that is 
the assistance a man gets when he helps himself. There is no 
obligation on our part to help others ; we may or may not help 
them as we judge best. We have no duties, because we have no 
masters to assign us duties. Nature evidently has made no. pro- 
vision for those who cannot help themselves ; in the ordinary 
course of things they are left to perish. It is well to help those 
in distress, but, as we have already intimated, not because we 
feel that there is any such duty imposed upon us. It is no more 
our duty than it is the duty of a million of other men to relieve 
distress in any particular case. Why should we sacrifice alone 
in order to render aid that others are equally obligated to make ? 
Primarily, we are expected to help ourselves, and if all did so, no 
one would need assistance. All we do outside of helping our- 



3(3 



LEADING DOCTRINES. 



selves is a work of supererogation. Besides, we get no thanks, 
and rarely does the result in any case compare with the sacrifice 
made. To make a business of charity, as is done at the present 
day, is corrupting in its influence. It is not the poor usually 
who depend upon charity so much as the agents whose business 
it is to dispense charity. In all our charitable institutions, it is 
the officers and attendants who are the real beneficiaries. In 
America, as in Great Britain, public charity has resulted in a 
painful scandal. There can be no question about the fact that 
charity multiplies paupers and developes poverty. Relieving 
wants, in one place leads to new wants in another place. If a 
person is presented with a horse, he finds that he needs a wagon 
and harness, and something to feed the horse. 

What is right, and what is wrong? Everything is right and 
everything is wrong. There is no standard of right and wrong 
that will apply in any two cases. What is right 
V\ hcvt is Right ? . g w j ia £ p e0 pi e have come to believe to be right. 

What is right for one people is wrong for another. Where every- 
body steals, and where a living is made by stealing and robbery, 
nobody considers such acts criminal or even improper. This was 
so in Sparta, and it is so to-day in all countries where people live 
by war and rapine. The interests of people determine customs 
and settle all questions of right or wrong. There is no other 
standard at last than self-interest. Even we ourselves have one 
standard for our friends and another for those whom we con- 
sider our enemies. We even consider it right to go to war and 
kill our enemies on sight, generally for some offence that we 
merely imagine they have committed. 

There are no real sins, no real crimes. There are only things 
that some people regard as crimes. If things were not declared 
to be wicked or criminal, no one would think of 
No Real Sins. ca ji j n g SU ch acts by such names. Nothing is posi- 
tively good or positively bad. What is bad at one time is good 
at another. It is usually considered bad to kill a man, but if he 
has done us great injury or given us great offence, or if he has 
violated our laws, that makes a difference in our view of the 
matter ; and if we happen to kill the delinquent in such a case, 
it will be regarded as a case of " justifiable homicide." What we 
mean by doing right, is doing what is considered right by the 
community in which we live. There is no other standard. Our 
main effort should be to keep out of other people's way — and 
especially out of the way of those who are inimical to us. The 
lower animals have learned as much as that. 



LEADING DOCTRINES. 



87 



There is no room for ambition in this world, no occasion for 
the exercise of its power upon men. There are no adequate in- 
ducements offered to any person to make sacrifices 

Fame. j n or( j er ^ se cure fame. Of all follies, the pursuit 
of fame is the chief. To seek honors and titles, to covet badges 
and gold lace as ornaments for the person, is absolutely childish. 
Savages, too, like glitter and tinsel, but such things are quite 
beneath the notice of rational men. However, the savage and 
the child remain a part of a man's nature during the whole of 
his career — in other words, he never quite ceases to be a savage, 
and he never quite overcomes the tendency to act like a child. 



Morals are founded upon customs, and they never have had 
or can have any higher source than that. Morals change as the 
feelings and interests of people change. There is 
nothing in morals that may be regarded as estab- 
lished for all time. They have no support but the opinions of 
men, and, as we know, the opinions of men are always controlled 
by interests and feelings. 



Let us have no sacrifices, no ceremonies. They are a wicked 
waste of time and material. Sacrifices are an abomination, and 
ceremonies are worthless and delusive. How 

Ceremonies. 

senseless, how cruel are sacrifices of all kinds ! 
Simply an effort to unload the sins of one who is guilty upon the 
shoulders of another who is innocent ! Criminals and dishonest 
people always like to find those who are willing to make sacri- 
fices for their benefit. The reason, and the only reason, why 
Christians love Christ, is that he gave up his life to keep their 
own poor souls out of purgatory. 



Shall we live after death? Shall we think and feel and know 

and have a real practical existence after death ? No. We Shall 

„ , live after death precisely as we lived before birth, 
After Death. 

and its value to us will be just as great, and no 
more. 



Let us have scriptures of some kind, some sacred writings 
that are instructive and that are adapted to- the wants of this 
commercial age of ours. What Moses wrote or 

r ' what Plato wrote concerns us but little just now. 
The question is : What do wise and sensible men think to-day ? 
What such men thought a year or a thousand years ago, does 
not affect the solution of the problem in the slightest degree. 



38 



LEADING DOCTRINES. 



There are no single things. The simplest thing known, as 
a sound, a stream, a force, a thread, is really a compound or 
Single Thinp-s co ^ ec ^ on ma( le up of many parts. Every body im- 
plies an organization, and this again implies parts. 
All things are parts of things, and yet, paradoxical as it may 
sound, they are complete in themselves, and therefore not 
properly parts. All things are organized groups, like the tree 
or plant. Nothing is single. 



Things are only as we look at them. If we feel badly, things 

will look badly to us. Whether things please or displease us, 

depends largely, if not wholly, upon our constitu- 

& A ^i We tion and tastes. If we could make ourselves better, 
See Things. n . . 

all the world would at once appear to us m an 

improved form. If there is sunshine in our soul, there will be 

sunshine outside. Above all things, cultivate a cheerful and 

contented spirit. One's whole happiness depends upon thai. 



People can profess religion, and they usually do, without 
accepting or adopting it, and even without understanding it. 



Every man is entitled to what he earns. But if every man 
got what he fairly earned, nobody would be employed. There 
Earni g wom,( i be no inducement to employ men. Noth- 
ing would be gained thereby. People get rich by 
what other people earn — and that is the only way by which any 
man can accumulate property. 

In matters that concern yourself only, do as you please. 
In matters that concern others, follow custom or the public sense 
of propriety in all things. 



As intimated before, there are no good or bad things, except 
as we think. Badness or goodness is simply what we think and 
G d Bad ^ ee ^- So mu sic is good for one, bad for another, 
and indifferent for another who perhaps does not 
care for music. When we say people are bad, that is not the 
slightest evidence that they are bad. It is merely an evidence of 
what we think and how we feel. 



Let there be no punishments, no pains, no tortures, no 

sorrows of which we are the occasion. We should at least hold 

_ . , ourselves guiltless, no matter what others may 

Punishments, , . , , , 
decide to do. 



LEADING DOCTRINES. 



39 



People think correctly always, so far as they think at all. 
But people differ in conclusions, varying with the course pursued. 

in their inquiries, as well as the distance they 

oug s ' travel. If all followed the same route and traveled 
the same distance, they would reach substantially the same re- 
sults at the close of their investigation. 



We see things only as they appear to us ; we know, and can 
know, nothing of them beyond that. 



People know much of this world only on condition that they 
have traveled through it and seen much of it. A practical ac- 
See the World c l uam ^ ance ^ s ^ ar De tter than theory and medita- 
' tion. Contact with the world is the only thing 
that sharpens the intellect. A man might study in a garret a 
thousand years and then know really little of the true character 
of the world in which he lives. People can read about foreign 
countries, and even study pictures, and yet they must see 
these countries themselves to know them. 



Does it follow that because we see nothing, there is nothing 
to be seen ? What you see or do not see, or what some one else 
sees or does not see, has nothing to do with the 

W licit xOtl S66 

matter. What we see has nothing to do with the 
existence of truth for any one but ourselves. There are thou- 
sands and millions of things that none of us have ever seen, and 
yet we know that they exist, for others. 



People should honor no one, worship no one, thank no one — 
not even God, the supposed ruler of the universe. All that men 
N W h' OD ^ am that is worth obtaining must come from 
1 ' their own efforts, their own care, their own sagac- 

ity and thoughtfulness. The help of other people is of no real 
service to anybody. 



What real inducements are there in this world for anybody 
to make great acquisitions ? If a man gains the whole world and 
. . . loses his own soul, what is the profit to him ? Or 

if he does not lose his soul, how much better is he 
off ? At best a man can use only what he uses, and what he does 
not use and cannot use is a damage to him. The richest and 
strongest man in the country gets only his living ; and a man of 
very moderate means gets as much as that, and then, too, he has 
no surplus wealth to be bothered with. 



40 



LEADING DOCTRINES. 



Self-reliance should be the main support of every one. In- 
dividuality is the basis of life. The continued effort of nature is 
Self Reliance ^° mc ^ v idualize ; the efforts of man seem to be 
just the opposite. Men like crowds, and they have 
a tendency to herd together. A man can control his own actions 
at all times, but not the actions of others, and certainly not the 
acts of God. What a man cannot depend on, he should never 
count on. A man may get some assistance from outside sources, 
but it is always an uncertain and unreliable factor, and it usu- 
ally costs in the end a great deal more than it is worth. People 
imagine they get something for nothing, but they never do. 

There are no accidents in nature, and none really in practical 
life. Whatever occurs comes in the natural course of things. 
Fatalism Fatalism is an element that we should never 
regard, or certainly never count upon. Things 
would result differently, if they had taken a different course. 
Results are necessary, but the course that leads to results is not 
necessary. That is in all cases a matter of choice and will. 



There is no exhibition of true power in the affairs of men. 
What men seem to be compelled to do, they really do at last of 

p their own will. The will of others cannot be af- 

fected by what we do. People may choose be- 
tween this thing and that, but they always do as they will in the 
end. 



The first step towards sound health is the cleansing of the 
system from all impurities and from all germs of disease. So in 
Cleansing preparing the mind, or the soul, for the business 
the System. of ^ e > tne m ' st ste P to ^ e taken is to remove all 
antiquated notions, all unsound and hurtful be- 
liefs, such as the belief in fate or necessity, in the unavoidable- 
ness of evil, in the necessity of making sacrifices and paying 
homage to God and the state, in the observance of worthless 
customs and practices, in the duty of obedience to masters, and 
in the need of love and charity for other people. 

Do not be so particular about your honor. It does not possess 

half the importance that you imagine it does. Do not be so 

anxious to make things even with everybody. 
Your Honor. „ . . & . :L . 

Such an equalizing process is expensive. Things 

will come out even at last without any special effort on your 

part— if you will only wait. 



LEADING DOCTRINES. 



41 



People would save themselves much worry and trouble if 
they would only get improved notions of value. Tilings have no 
value in themselves, or at least one thing is as 
valuable as another. The values that things have 
is the value that men assign to them, and it is for this reason that 
what we call the value of things is constantly changing. Things 
have value only so far as people covet them, and things not 
wanted by any one are absolutely worthless. We prize things 
as a rule too highly, and hence we are afflicted by their loss. If 
we estimate things lightly, as one should, we should avoid the 
sorrows that usually follow losses. We place too high a value on 
what we assume to be our property. If we conceded that it be- 
longed to some one else, or that it did not belong to any one. we 
should have a lower estimate of its value and suffer less from its 
deprivation. 

Spinoza says there can be no sensible living in this world 
without knowledge. Therefore it should be the first and chief 

Knew leo>e a * m °^ man to 8' am knowledge. But above all, he 
° ' should endeavor to ascertain what knowledge is in 
the first place. Some things that are called knowledge go by the 
wrong name. 

Man is part of nature, and to live well, he should be in 
harmony with nature. To have knowledge, is to know how to 
promote one's harmony with his surroundings. 

As a matter of principle, societies and organizations of all 
kinds should be discouraged, because they hamper and hypnotize 
Or anizations ^ e i^i^dual. man can be independent only 
so long and so far as he lives alone. The more he 
associates, the more he must surrender to the will and wishes of 
other people. When a man does his own work unaided, he has 
no one to whom he must render account for what he has 
performed. 

To fully understand things, we must bring them nearer to 
us. When they are remote, we fail to notice all their features 
Xearer anC ^ P ecunar i^ es - ^ s we o et nearer to things, 
to" Things. our interest in them increases. 

If we did not love so much, we would not hate so much. 
It is better not to love at all, since then we should not hate. It 
is impossible to tell exactly whether love comes 
from hate, or hate from love. They are intimately 



42 



LEADING DOCTRINES. 



associated, and even inseparably connected. We hate those 
often that we formerly loved; we hate those from whom we 
have expected much and received little. Disappointment always 
occasions an unpleasant shock. It is better not to ask or ex- 
pect anything from any one. It is only from our friends, from 
those whom we love, that we demand so much. Those with 
whom we have no relations we regard with indifference, which 
is much better than to either love them or hate them. It is 
better to have but few close friends, outside at least of one's own 
family. Much of our trouble in life arises from our being too 
intimate with people — they expect too much of us, and we ex- 
pect too much of them." Disappointment is sure to occur in such 
cases. It is rare that any friend can meet all the requirements 
of some other friend. We never hate people that we do not 
know and with whom we have had no relations. We expect 
nothing of people who are not considered our friends. Our 
enemies never disappoint us, and we know very well where we 
shall find them. Not so with friends always. It is a well known 
fact that we like people best of whom we really know little. It 
is generally not advisable to know people too well. Most of the 
social enjoyment in travel arises from the fact that you do not 
know those whom you meet, and they do not know you. 

First of all, let us endeavor to get clear and accurate notions 
of things — of wealth, of pain, of pleasure, of happiness, of good- 
ness, of love, of friendship, of truth. If we knew 

Our Desires 

some things better than we do, as wealth, pleasure 
and fame for instance, we should not desire them. To live com- 
fortably and sensibly, let us always curb our desires. We desire 
things too often and too much ; we desire what we cannot get, 
or what w« ought not to have ; and as a matter of course, un- 
satisfied desire uniformly leads to pain and disappointment. 
People that ask little, that expect little, that desire little, are 
seldom disappointed. We often desire what is not good for us, 
forgetting that what is good for others, under other circum- 
stances, may not be good for us under different circumstances. 

Men are continually dying, since, as we know, they are con- 
tinually changing. All things that change, even in the slightest, 

cease to exist. A thing continues to exist only so 
Continually . ., . . , . , ., 

Dying long as it remains precisely what it was m the 

beginning. What has changed has disappeared 

and exists no more. 



Ignorance leads us to fear a thousand things that we should 



LEADING DOCTRINES. 



43 



not fear if we were not ignorant. Let us strive to overcome ig- 
norance, or banish it in some way. 



Do not worry over the nature of truth or over obligations 
to truth. Do not contend for anything so perishable and so 

T th evanescent as truth. There is no such thing as 
truth for all men. Truth is a local and exclusive 
matter. It is at best only a one-sided affair, or perhaps a many- 
sided affair. 



The safest way is to pay as you go and owe no man anything. 
Above all things, make no compacts or contracts, and keep your- 
self free from obligations at all times. By so do- 
ing you may continue to be a free man. 



The rules that are laid down in this work are like all general 
rules — they cannot be safely followed in all cases. There comes 

R ^ a time when the best of rules must be disregarded. 

But these exceptions do not weaken the rule in 
the least. It is impossible to lay down a rule to fit all cases. 
An approximation to truth is the most that is to be expected in 
any instance. 



We should avoid waste at all times, and yet three-fourths of 
all that men do, or build, or contrive, is waste. Our buildings 
■ are sufficient evidence in this direction, so is our 

dress. In our effort to warm a room, there is far 
more heat that escapes than is ever utilized. In all that civilized 
men do, they are frightfully wasteful. 



To do what is expedient is sensible, and to do what is sensi- 
ble is necessarily expedient. That is the chief rule that should 

govern man's action at all times. To undertake to 
Expedient. ° ,, , , , 

follow duty, or to do what is right, is simply a 

vain effort. There is really no duty devolving upon any man 
except one who is a slave ; and as to what is right between men, 
that is purely a matter of opinion. But is not our opinion in 
such a case just as good as that of other men ? Who shall pre- 
sume to tell us what we ought to do ? According to our view of 
the case, there is no such man living. We are our own judge and 
our own master. We submit to the laws because we find it ex- 
pedient to do so, but we protest when we do so. We never lick 
the hand smites us ; we simply try to brush the hand away so 
that it shall not smite us again. We do not love our enemies, 



44 



LEADING DOCTRINES. 



we do not hate our enemies. We simply turn our back upon 
them and keep out of their way. When we seek society, we al- 
ways prefer friends ; and in the absence of friends, we seek the 
company of strangers. We keep entirely away from those who 
are not inclined to be neighborly at least. Indeed, the less a 
man has to do with his enemies, so long as they remain such, the 
better it is for all concerned. 



It is all of life to live ; there is no other problem set before 
men which is so worthy of their concern. If a man knows how 
to live, he knows all that he will ever need to know. 



It is wrong for us to assume or declare that this or that is 
necessary. It is only a matter of opinion at best. How shall we 
ever know whether anything is or is not neces- 
Jsecessary. sar y? Who shall decide that question? Some- 
times we use the word necessary as a synonym for expedient. 
We say it is necessary to have government, or religion, or law, 
or education. Again, it may be said, this is merely a matter of 
opinion on which men differ. We never know that anything is 
necessary, for it belongs to the future, and of that we know 
nothing. We say government is necessary for the protection of 
the people. But does the law protect the people in all cases? 
Does it do so in any case ? We say punishments are necessary, 
in order that society may be protected. But that is only an ex- 
cuse, a mere pretence. We do not know that such things are 
necessary. Many get along very well without punishments. 
Nothing is necessary, nothing is unavoidable. How shall we 
ever know whether things are necessary or not? We say this or 
that is necessary for self-defence, but that is merely an excuse, 
a pure fiction, a pious fraud. Taxes are said to be necessary, 
but only because we imagine so. There is not the slightest evi- 
dence that they are either necessary or unavoidable. 



There is only one kind of accumulation that deserves to be 
encouraged, and that is an accumulation of what is needed for 
future use. All accumulations beyond this, all 
those made to prevent others from acquiring, or 
those made with a view to make a display of great gains, de- 
serve the severest condemnation from every man. In other 
words, we would discourage the accumulation of wealth in every 
form and under all conditions. 



Never do anything without having some sensible aim or ob- 



LEADING DOCTRINES. 



40 



ject in view. Let everything count. That is simply business — it 

B S 'ble * S a * S ° common sense - The savage is fully justi- 
fied in looking with surprise upon one who walks 
merely for exercise. A savage does nothing of the kind. He 
never walks unless he wishes to go somewhere. Ennui never 
troubles a savage, and when he does anything, he always expects 
some tangible, appreciable result from his effort. 

Talk about our love for truth, when nearly all that we do is 
based upon some fiction, or upon some conventional lie ! Like 
children, we are inordinately fond of pretending, 
' or of acting some assumed part. We like to play 
do this and play do that. And ofttimes, like children, we pre- 
tend to be mad when we are not mad at all ; or we play that we 
love people, when in fact our affections are of the mildest type. 
That is merely a part of the programme. It means nothing, and 
we should never be deceived by what is known to be pantomime. 

Some things, mere trifles in themselves, we take too seri- 
ously ; while other things, really of first-class importance, we 
pass by without any particular attention. We 
should always draw a line of distinction between 
things unimportant and things worth noticing. 

"So they hanged Haman on the gallows that he had pre- 
pared for Mordecai." — Esth. viii.-IO. That often happens. It is a 
common occurrence for men to fall into pits which 
they have digged for others. It does not pay to 
go to the trouble of setting snares for one's enemies. Digging pits 
and setting snares is not a nice business any way. 

We should never make an effort to do injury to those whom 
we consider our enemies. Perhaps some day they may become 

our friends. Indeed, it is curious to see how 
and Friends. sn ght a thing makes a man your enemy, and again 

how slight a thing makes him your friend. Really, 
being a man's enemy or being his friend is not such a great 
affair after all ; and there is not such a great difference between 
the two as people commonly imagine. There are worse people, 
far worse, than those who happen just at this moment to be our 
enemies. The very best of men may be our enemy, and the very 
worst of men may be our friend. Whether a man is our friend 
or our enemy proves absolutely nothing as to his character and 
value. That we do not like a man, has no significance whatever. 



4-6 



LEADING DOCTRINES. 



Everybody is somebody's enemy and somebody's friend. The 
matter is not worth talking about. Even our friends often do 
us harm, sometimes innocently and sometimes for a purpose. 
Mortal enemies are few, and from these we should stand aloof 
as we would from a madman. What we call enmity usually 
arises from slight causes, and it hardly ever extends below the 
surface. The less we bother with enmity the better ; let the 
disease run its course. The more attention we give the matter, 
the more the trouble is aggravated. In nine cases out of ten 
where people get offended at us, it is for something they have 
heard or dreamed, and not for something that they know. It is 
silly indeed for people to become easily offended. The best way 
for us in such cases is to wait till recovery sets in and the patient 
begins to feel better. 

Do not kill. Do not torture or torment, do not punish. This 
rule is without exceptions or qualifications. Kill nobody, kill no 
creature, kill nothing. This rule is good through- 
n0 v out its whole extent, and it should be applied, like 
all rules, as far as practicable. 

Be economical at all times, which is the same as to avoid 
being wasteful. It is the part of a fool to be extravagant or 
wasteful. Be judicious and careful, always being circumspect, 
always prudent and wise. 

Presents are corrupting ; they are meant to be corrupting by 
those who make them. Any person who gives without having 

some purpose or design must be classed with idiots, 
are Corrupting There is no essential difference between a present 

and a bribe. Every bribe is merely a presents — it is 
something for nothing. People should never give something for 
nothing ; people should never receive something for nothing. It 
is not judicious to do so. 

We should free ourselves at once from the absurd notion that 
what we have believed we should continue to believe. Rather 
the contrary. We should cease to believe what we 
have believed, for all the beliefs of the past must 
be wrong — that is, wrong for people of the present time. If a 
belief has prevailed for a long time, the inference follows that 
it is out of date, since the times and conditions have changed. 
People of to-day cannot live successfully upon notions that are 
two thousand years old. Men should be free at all times to be- 
lieve what they choose and what seems to them to be adapted to 



LEADING DOCTRINES. 



47 



their present wants and interests. The interests of other people 
are no affairs of ours — only so far as they happen to affect our 
interests. 

Have no secrets, and never do things that you are ashamed 
to have the world know. Or expressed in another form, no man 
should be ashamed of what he has clone, for what 

^To Secrets. 

he did, it is to be presumed, he believed to be en- 
tirely right. 

The best talent that any man can possess is common sense. 
Even success in business depends more upon sound judgment 
than upon genius. 

You cannot convince a man by telling him he is a fool or lie n 
wrong. He must be allowed to have his own convictions — he 
P tience mus ^ be self -convinced. How much you are con- 
vinced does not affect the case at all with him. 
You must be patient and indulgent. Even if this man is a fool, 
it is well to remember that all men are fools at times. How 
often are we ourselves compelled to change our opinions because 
they are found to be wrong ! 

Why should we care what people say of us ? If they speak 

favorably, we are pleased ; but if they speak ill, why should we 

„ T1 _ „, worry? Why should people be concerned about 
What Men Say. * AT . 

what they cannot possibly help ? Nothing that we 

can do can prevent people from thinking and talking. Besides, 
we are not responsible for what they think nor for what they 
talk. Talk is usually idle ; it is also very common and very 
cheap. The safest of all rules is to let people talk. It does them 
good and makes them feel better. Only think what a punish- 
ment it would be to people to prevent them from talking, and 
even telling a lie occasionally ! It would be a wicked obstruction 
placed in the way of things to prevent them from taking their 
natural course. There should be no law against slander. People 
who slander others are liars and nobody ever thinks of believing 
a liar. 



Mistaken impressions ! Under what a load of oppressive 
burdens do we constantly labor ! Mistaken notions, ideas, con- 
ceptions and beliefs ! That they are false, is a fact 
Impressions. ., „ , , 1 

that we well know, but they pass current, like our 

silver dollars, and they are accepted as genuine. Men are ex- 
ecuted in all countries on no other evidence than false impres- 



4S 



LEADING DOCTRINES. 



sions in connection with the guilt of the accused. Such things 
are a common occurrence in every land. 

As all things are independent of each other, and all are dis- 
connected, there can be no such thing as order or series. It is 

o impossible to classify things without ignoring dif- 

ferences that are known to exist. For instance, all 
the propositions in this review are quite independent of each 
other, and they are so treated. There is no order or sequence in 
them. 



To be fair, to be just, to be true to ourselves, we must divest 
ourself of our interests and prejudices. These things are the 
impedimenta that retard our progress through life. 

Two opposing or incongruous assertions may be true. One 
truth never excludes or negatives another truth. It has nothing 
to do with another truth. 



A thermometer has no feelings, no weaknesses, no impres- 
sions, no whims ; and therefore it registers temperature cor- 
rectly. With man the case is different. All he 
judges from is his feelings, and feelings are al- 
ways deceptive in their indications. A man who enters a room 
can never tell with any sort of exactness just how hot or how 
cold it is. So he consults a thermometer. 
* 

The only business that is uniformly well conducted is that 
which the person interested conducts for himself. Public busi- 
ness is generally a failure, especially from the 

Business 

standpoint of economy, because those who conduct 
the business have no direct personal interest in its success. 
Their interest is to make all they can out of the enterprise and 
still keep out of state prison. 



"A large tax in the aggregate is only a trifle for each in- 
dividual. It is such a little thing ! " Read history, and you will 
f find that this is the very argument that has hypno- 
Trifles tized people in the past and enslaved the world. 

It is such a little thing ! But big things are made 
up of little things. As a rule people would rather listen to the 
sophistry of demagogues than take the advice of friends. That 
was the trouble with the Athenians. 



3 



LEADING DOCTRINES. 



49 



How does it come that the people as a body are always the 
under dog? That question is not hard to answer. Because the 
people are nobody — nobody in particular, nobody 

The People 

that amounts to anything. Nobody speaks for 
them, nobody acts for them, and they cannot speak and act for 
themselves, for they have neither voice nor mind. They are 
nothing but a shadow. Why should not the people always re- 
main the under dog ? 

The true doctrine is that everybody should pay his own bills, 
but that is a practice, we must confess, that does not work well 
in civilized countries. Just the reverse is the rule 
Kelp Others. p reva y g there. In such countries it is ex- 

pected that everybody should be doing something continually for 
everybody but himself. But if that doctrine should be carried 
out exclusively and literally, what would become of the man 
who was always doiDg something for other people and conse- 
quently neglecting his own affairs ? He would soon perish as the 
fool perisheth. What an idiotic practice this would be ! But 
people should not be deceived. It was never intended that all 
should be good. Only a portion of the people, the fools, are to 
be good — the fools are to obey the laws, pay other people's debts, 
reverence their masters, believe in God, and finally go to Heaven ! 
The fools, we repeat, make the sacrifices. The wise men take 
the good things of earth as they go along. They fare sumptu- 
ously and live like princes every day. They do not bother their 
heads about the world to come. 



Stand up ; do not be afraid. Never be a hypocrite. Be 

honest with yourself and candid with others at all times. Never 

say what you do not mean, nor mean what you do 
Stand up. J J _. . , ' XT J 

not say. Be a slave to no man. Never assume 

the attitude nor perform the duties of a slave, even for form's 

or fashion's sake. Never call yourself a crawling worm, when 

you know you are really a biped. Do not make a practice of 

depreciating yourself merely to appear polite and stand well in 

society. If you can lift two hundred pounds, or five hundred 

pounds, and know you can lift that weight, do not be ashamed of 

it and go around saying you can only lift half as much. If you 

do not respect yourself, how can you expect to be respected by 

others ? 

If people say that a man is great or good, and even swear to 
it, does that make it so ? What does reputation amount to ? 
What reliance shall we place upon the claim or sayings of men ? 



50 



LEADING DOCTRINES. 



Much depends upon our aims in life. Men never reach 
higher than they aim ; if they aim low, their attainments will of 
course be low. Let us not bother our heads to 
pursue worthless things. If we chase bubbles, we 
shall only secure bubbles when we happen to be successful in the 
pursuit. 

If the end ever justifies the means, why does it not always? 
On that basis, why is not any and every crime justifiable ? It 

, „ , certainlv must be so. if the end justifies the means. 
Means and End. _ z . 3 , _ , L . 

One end is as good as any other end; it is al- 
ways good for some and bad for others. But in fact nothing is 
justified, except that which justifies itself. No, the end never 
justifies the means — there is no connection between the means and end 
in any case. There is no relation between the act and the object 
of the act. Aims are wholly in men's minds — they are intan- 
gible, indefinable, and therefore wholly imaginary. Nobody ever 
knows what a man's aims are, and it often occurs that he does 
not know what they are himself. 

What is the use of trying to reason with people who have no 
reason, or who at least do not believe in reason ? For them there 
can be no evidence, and to undertake to argue with such people 
is time misapplied in every instance. 

What is a law ? Merely the dictum of somebody. What is 
an emperor? A common mortal, just such a man in every re- 
t . spect as we meet in our walks every day. He is 

King ? often as good as other people, but never any better. 

His wearing a crown makes no difference in either 
his worth or power. It only makes him appear a few inches 
taller. If he wears a gown, that is merely to conceal the fact 
that he has feet and legs like other people. There is nothing 
about the dress and appearance of a king that is not meant to 
deceive and impose upon the multitude. The sole object is to 
make the king appear to be what he is not — and the same prac- 
tice is followed, on a smaller scale, by people in the common 
walks of life. 



Every man should be estimated and rated at what he actu- 
ally is, without any reference to his relations to other men. 

Worth Circumstances do not make men — neither office, 
rank, position or descent has anything to do with a 
man's real worth. Every man is merely what he is, and no 
power on earth can ever make him more than he is. Nothing 



LEADING DOCTRINES. 



51 



can be added to a pound to make it weigh more than a pound. 
If a man is six feet tall, not the highest hat in the world could 
make him a half inch taller than he is. Race is nothing, color is 
nothing, rank is nothing, family is nothing, country is nothing, 
religion is nothing, when one comes to estimate the true worth 
and character of individuals. There is no such thing as real merit, 
no such thing as one man\i being greater or better than another man. 
There is no merit in a man's powers, for he does not create them ; 
there is no merit in his conduct, for at best he does only what he 
can do and ought to do. 

Men are continually believing and acting contrary to what 
they know. They know there is no power or efficacy in a written 
m law — a whole law library has no more power over 

Know the conduct of men than would be found in a bank 
of common sand — and yet people go on obeying 
the law because they feel that they must, and they imagine that 
the law could do something serious to them if they did not obey 
it. In the same way people carry a rabbit's foot about their 
person as a charm against evil. They know it is nothing but a 
common rabbit's foot, still they believe in the charm just the 
same. So men worship a king or a governor as a god, though 
they know very well that he is not a god but an ordinary mortal. 
We might extend these illustrations indefinitely, but it is not 
necessary. Every day in our lives we are acting contrary to 
what we know to be the facts of the case. We are constantly say- 
ing one thing and meaning another. We claim to love the truth, 
and yet we adore lies and deception above all things. Talk about 
truth in this world ! It is lies that always take the preference. No 
wonder that our library shelves are loaded down with novels. 
It only adds another proof that men love lies rather than truth. 
St. John tells us that the men of his time loved darkness rather 
than light, and they do still. They always prefer shadows to 
the glorious light of the morning sun. 

We should take the world as we find it. There is really no 
occasion for any one to complain. Things are right as they are. 

All is Ri ht ^ ife is ^ eat k * s right — both are necessary, 

absolutely necessary, to the continued existence of 
this world. The one always implies the existence of the other. 
So it is with pleasure and pain, light and darkness, and indeed 
all other extremes. One side, or one pole, is as necessary as the 
other. If there is an under side, there must also be an upper 
side. Pleasure is merely the absence of pain. Life implies the 
absence of death ; where life is, there death is not. Life gradates 



52 



LEADING DOCTRINES. 



continually into death, and from death again new life arises. 
There is no well denned line of demarkation between the two. 
So. less darkness means only more light. Health is only a rela- 
tive term : no man is entirely well, neither is any man entirely 
ill. If we had no knowledge of illness, we should have no ap- 
preciation of health. Remember that evil is only what we call 
evil, and bad is simply what we call bad, It all depends upon 
how we feel and how we view things. 



What is applause worth ? What good does applause do. 

what change does it effect ? It merely indicates how people feel, 

and often also how little thev know. Truth and 
Applause. ., ,, 7 T . 

merit are never strengthened by applause. If our 

achievements and acquirements depended entirely upon what 
other people thought, we should be very unfortunate indeed 
Applause is. like love, wholly a freakish affair, a matter of feel- 
ing, rather than of judgment. People love merely what they 
like, what pleases them, and applause is founded upon the same 
basis. Merit is a matter between the man and himself — ir is 
something with which others cannot meddle. How can the 
world measure the merit of men? It never does. "What the peo- 
ple, the multitude, say that a man is worth, is no proof of what 
he actually is worth. It should be constantly borne in mind that 
men have no just appreciation of anything. All they have at 
best is an approximation — never in any case do they attain to ex- 
act knowledge. Our whole conduct in life is based upon assump- 
tions and false notions — some of which we correct before we die 
and many of which remain with us to the end. It often happens 
that we replace one false notion with another false notion, and 
so go on ad infinitum. 



Remedy through law ! There is no such thing as a remedy 
through law. Law is. in practice, a curse to humanity in general. 

though it may result in benefit to a few. Consider 
^Law m t ^ ie delay and expense of law : consider its injus- 
tice and uncertainty. How perfectly helpless the 
government is to afford relief in emergencies like the coal strike 
of 1902 : 



Who rules this world? Those only mho think. Who get all the 
good things of this world ? Those who think and plan and have 
an eye to the future at all times. Those who do 
Thinners. ^ are jj^ one5 w j 1Q must g et their living 

bv hard work. Their lot in life resembles that of the patient ox. 



LEADING DOCTRINES. 



53 



There is too much twaddle in this world altogether. Every- 
body talks too much. Everybody says a thousand things that 
he might better leave unsaid. It is such a waste of breath ! 

Nothing adds to the strength of the strong man like hard- 
ship and want ; and nothing has such a tendency to weaken a 
man as constant favors and assistance. In this 
Strength. wa j the children who are growing up to-day are 
being persistently spoiled. They do not have to put forth any 
efforts themselves, because everything is done for them. The 
course that is being pursued all over the land is certain to be 
fatal to the rising generation. If you want to ruin a son, give 
him all the money he wants and then let him go and do as he 
pleases. 

At best, all that men can render on any question is simply 
their opinions. It appears so to them — never anything beyond that. . 

But because of their opinions, it does not follow 
Opinions. t ^ at ^ e f ac ts are so or so by any means. Usually 
one man's opinion on a subject is no better than some other 
man's opinion. 

Do not pay too much attention to imaginary injuries — to 
those that hurt the soul, the mind, the feelings, our sensibilities 
— in other words, things that affect our dignity. If 
we gave no attention or consideration to these 
offences, we would not know that they existed. A high sense of 
honor is a troublesome possession for any man. 

People have an idea that they see all that is before their eyes. 
But in fact they see only what they happen to notice, which is 

Seein n0t a tnousan( ^ tn P art °^ wna * they might see if 

they would only look. Even a picture presents 
only one out of very many phases of an object, each as true and 
important as the one that is presented. 

Never grieve about what cannot be helped ; never grieve 
about things that may never occur ; never grieve at all, for the 
suffering that comes from grief never brings any returns. 

Why should a sensible man ever be angry ? Anger is mad- 
ness, and madness is allied to insanity. It is not manly to appear 
mad, any more than it is manly for one to be be- 
side himself from any cause. When a man is 
enraged, he has lost his senses, and he is properly called mad. 



54 



LEADING DOCTRINES. 



When a man is drunk, the case is not very different. In both 
cases a man has lost control over himself for a certain period of 
time. There is nothing to call for anger and nothing to justify 
such an exhibition at any time. Anger usually takes its rise 
in pride and conceit, and if people had less of these things, 
we would see less evidence of anger than we do. People who 
have extravagant notions of honor and of their own importance 
are very easily offended, and when people are offended, they 
usually act inconsiderately. 

It is not conscience that makes cowards of us all. It is usu- 
ally the fear of losing a little money. People would stand up f or 
their rights, if they were not afraid of losing some patronage. 

Protection is always a one-sided affair. We protect one man 

always at the expense, and often to the injury, of others — and so 

„ . it is always with gifts, favors, privileges and sub- 
Protection. ... Jl_ ,_f. ' . . • . X, 

sidies. These things always act unjustly upon 
some men, for what is the gain of one man is always the loss of 
some other party. We protect the cat at the expense of the 
mice, little animals that have in fact as many rights as cats have. 
The poor are always protected and favored at the expense of the 
wealthy aud middle classes, who to say the least are as worthy 
as the poor are. Most people are not protected or favored in any 
manner. Tariffs, and protection of all kinds, are for the benefit 
of the few always, and never for the public generally. Those who 
imagine that the case is ever different will find by experience 
that they are grievously mistaken. To tax the public for protec- 
tion in any case, is always outrageously unjust and oppressive. 
The only just protection that could exist, is protection for everybody. 
But that is a kind that no one has ever yet seen. 

As a rule people never care who suffers nor how much, if 
they themselves are only protected. We protect our sugar by 
placing a tax on other people's sugar. Somebody pays the bill 
that covers the cost of protection in all cases. This is the w T ay 
that government works in all its departments — it favors a few at 
the expense of the many. It is impossible, as already intimated, to 
favor one without wronging others. And the main business of 
government is to help people who are favorites. Government is 
for all practical purposes a fraud — it builds up and protects the 
few at the expense of the public. But people consent to the 
swindle, and that makes it all right. This consent removes the 
stigma. 

The Christian doctrine has done an immense amount of evil 



LEADING DOCTRINES. 



55 



through dwelling constantly upon the dark side of things and 
making everything appear so much blacker than 
Doctrine ^ really is. Nothing is a sin, or wrong, or a' 
crime, unless we consider it so. Sin and wicked- 
ness and blackness generally is only in ourselves. It is as we see 
it, as we make it. What the Christians call sin goes with others 
by another name. So it is evident that it is wholly a matter of 
opinion. There is no other sin or crime than that which we feel 
or imagine. So we increase our pains and sorrows by dwelling 
on them and magnifying them. People delight to talk about 
original sin ! But there never was any. If we merely imagine a 
thing or believe a thing, that of course does not make it so. We 
imagine that there are ghosts, witches, demons and all such 
things, but that does not prove that there are any such existences 
outside of our thoughts. 

What governs a man's conduct in life ? Not what is taught 
in his Bible, not what the state orders or directs, but what he 
W k t q believes to be right or necessary, or at least to be 

calculated to promote his welfare. That and 
that alone governs a man's action. What a man does is a matter 
wholly batween himself and himself. Change a man's belief 
and you will change his whole life and being. In no other way 
can such a result be achieved. Codes never make a man better — 
they do not govern his conduct, except perhaps in a few particu- 
lars. Our Bible is full of rules and commands that nobody ob- 
serves. After all, the only real master that any man can have is 
himself. No matter how powerful his oppressor may be, he him- 
self can be free any moment, if he wills. His master might kill 
him, but he could not take his freedom from him. He could not 
compel him to obey. People who are not afraid of dying or 
being injured may always be free. 

It is a strange dispensation that we are now living under ! 
If a man has offended us, or if he is in our way, we can do all 
A Strange manner °f t* ac ^ things to him, and it will be all 
Doctrine rigtit , according to the prevailing spirit of the 
times. We can lie about our enemies, we can 
damage them in various ways, simply because they are not to 
our liking. It is a monstrous doctrine too well followed ! What 
business is it to us what other people do, or what business is it to 
them whether we like them or not ? 



Truth lies at the bottom of a well, and rather a deep well at 
that. It is like gold. You will never get it, unless you dig for 
it, and keep digging. 



56 



LEADING- DOCTRINES 



This world is not made of sweets exclusively — there is neces- 
sarily a mixture of the bitter that goes with the sweet. It is a 

pleasant thing to have friends, but in the verv 
>o Middle . e .„ . ' 

Ground nature of the case, if you have friends you must 

have enemies, for so far as you stand with certain 

ones you must be against certain other ones. There is no middle 

ground, and people must be on one side or the other. *To be on 

both sides is quite impracticable. 

The most pitiable attitude for any man to assume is that of a 
suppliant — a suppliant for favors, for money, for assistance, for 
A Su " llant P ar ^ on ' ^ man mil st have become wretched in- 
deed when he consents to take the part of a sup- 
pliant. And still all business at the present day is built up on 
supplications — ; ' soliciting " is the term used. What is the real 
difference between soliciting patronage and begging for pennies ? 
When a man solicits in business, he merely wants money. 

One of the most serious mistakes that people make, is to sup- 
pose that all the bad men are in prison or in jail ; or that the men 
who are in prison or in jail are appreciably worse than those who 
are on the outside. 

If people do not stand up for their rights, stand up bravely 
and stand up always, they will not be apt to get any rights in 
this country. 

We first pass laws by which to build up trusts, combinations 
and millionaires, and then we try to get rid of them. It is not so 

easilv done. Thev are too stronglv fortified. But 
Laws and . , ., -_ „ ; , . .„ , ■> 

Trust-. xt not De forgotten that if we had no laws, we 

should have no trusts nor combines, nor even 
millionaires. They would be an impossibility. 

People are perpetually telling what they would do ' 1 if they 
were in your place ! " How do they know what they would do if 
I Y ur Place ^ey were in your place ? How could they ever 
know ? Undoubtedly if they were in your place, 
and if they had the same knowledge of facts, the same character 
and disposition, and also had the same aims and purposes in view 
and were subject to the same influences as yourself, they would 
then do precisely as you do. But duplicates of that kind are 
never found. Alexander in a similar case made the proper 
answer to Parmenio when he advised Alexander to accept certain 
proposals : " So would I, were I Parmenio." 



LEADING DOCTRINES. 



57 



A man of wealth can have a fifty-acre lot to be buried in. 
But would that make him rest easier ? At best he could occupy 
but one corner. There are innumerable things that millions will 
not buy — and health and comfort are among the number. 

It is not the doing bad that is so bad, but the doing bad and 
constantly lying about it and trying to hoodwink other people. 
That is what is so bad in the estimation of mankind. Nobody 
likes to be fooled. 



There are so many people who imagine that they know, and 
therefore they can tell you, wmat God wants. There are a great 

many ministers and pious people who are affected 
Wants with hallucinations of that kind. Bishop Thoburn, 

from India, recently testified before the Senate 
committee in Washington on Philippine affairs. Together with 
other things that he affirmed positively, we notice this especially : 
" The American occupation of the Philippines was an act of 
God ! " But how should Bishop Thoburn know ? When did he 
see God last, or when did he converse with him ? Has he ever 
seen God or ever conversed with him? We reckon not. That 
privilege was denied even to Moses. Moses was favored with a 
rear view of the Almighty, according to the Bible, but nothing 
beyond that. ' ; My face shall not be seen," are the words of God 
as given in Exodus. It is rather late in the day for presuming 
men to be telling what God said, what God did, and what God 
wants. They have no acquaintance with God, and so they must 
know absolutely nothing of his wishes or commands. All such 
talk is a mere fiction, and the ordinary conception of God is a 
figment of the human brain. People delude themselves in the 
first place and then they try to delude others afterward. 

What sort of people are they who presume in all the affairs 

of life to lecture others and point out the short and sure route 

_ , that leads to life everlasting ? Who are the men 
What People? . , . ° , 

who assume to be so much wiser and worthier 

than we are ? Who are the men who legislate for us and act as 

our guides and judges ? Who are they who determine for us 

what is right and what is wrong, and who are the ones that feel 

privileged to inflict punishment upon us when we happen to be 

out of order? Who are those kind, Christian people that take 

such an unbounded interest in our welfare at all times? Strange 

to say, they are the commonest people in the world. Many of them 

have proved to be failures in the management of their own 

affairs ; many of them are foreigners who have not lived long 



58 LEADING DOCTRINES. 

enough in this country to be able to speak and write our lan- 
guage intelligibly. These people — our governors, masters, teach- 
ers, judges and policemen — are often ignorant, and sometimes 
willful and perverse. We are led to exclaim with the inspired 
writer: "What is man that God should be mindful of him?" 
However, God could not have been greatly concerned about the 
well-being of mankind, or he would certainly have left their 
destiny in better hands than it is now found. 

Under the Popes there was no thought, no freedom, no in- 
quiry, and of course there was. and there could be, no trouble. 
Freedom "^ Ut w ^ en f ree d° m emerged and the Reformation 
began, then the trouble commenced at once. Free- 
dom implies contention, conflict, and it exists only on condition 
that it meets with continued resistance. Freedom is always op- 
posed by that which tends to destroy freedom. When freedom 
of action ceases to meet with resistance, there is nothing for it to 
combat, and as a natural consequence it soon goes out of busi- 
ness and disappears. 

What should engross the attention of those who desire to be 
known as worthy and sensible men ? Not war. not fame, not 
gt ^ high ambition, not money-making, not pleasure- 

seeking. These in themselves are not worthy of 
the study and devotion of men. The study of music, of art, of 
color and architecture is far better and brings far more desirable 
returns than either war, fame or money. Study nature and na- 
ture's productions ; visit the fields, examine the flowers and gaze 
upon those wonderful products of time — the trees, the valleys, the 
hills, the mountains. Cultivate an acquaintance with the birds, 
and also with the beasts that gather around you. Even the 
tiniest insect, once understood, will be found to be as deserving 
of your attention as the most interesting specimen of the human 
fa mil v. 



Note.— As intimated before, we have attempted to follow no order 
in placing the paragraphs of this review. They contain independent prop- 
ositions and, having no relation to each other, they are incapable of clas- 
sification. However, they are none the less valuable because of that fact 
People will read a paragraph that will not take the trouble to peruse a 
page or scan consecutive pages. It often happens that the gist of the 
matter can be fairly set forth in a few lines. In repeated instances in 
this review the same idea has been presented in different words. The 
chief aim of the author has been to impress and convince the reader, and 
to do this successfully, where the thought presented is new, repetitions 
are necessary. A striking thought will bear being presented anew in any 
work. 



LEADING ARTICLES 
ox 

LIFE'S PROBLEMS. 



CHAPTER I. 

RELIGION. 

Religious belief has a natural birth and it dies a natural 
death, disappearing at last like all the rest of earth. Re- 
ligions do not die in a year or a century. They have their periods 
of rise and decline, and finally the time comes, as in the case of 
Paganism, when they cease to exist entirely. The Christian 
religion has had its rise and, having reached and passed the 
culminating point, it is now on the decline. And yet it may, 
and no doubt it will, remain an important factor in the world's 
history for hundreds of years to come. 

We make the common mistake in connection with religion 
that all peoples who have religions make. We imagine that ours 
is the first, greatest and really the only true religion that the 
world has yet produced. But this is a vain, almost a ridiculous 
assumption. No intelligent, thinking man doubts for a moment 
that our religion is only one out of a great many religions, some 
of which are older and have more converts, and some are younger 
and have fewer converts than ours has. Ours is not the only 
God there is or ever has been. He is only one out of many, some 
of which resemble him in many respects and some do not. The 
Egyptians, Greeks and Romans had a host of gods, and India has 
multitudes of them to-day. If we turn over the pages of history 
we shall find that gods have been numerous enough in the past, 
some of them being far more powerful than the one whom 



60 



RELIGION. 



we adore as our special God. Again, our Bible is not the only 
book of its kind in the world. It is only one bible out of many. 
Every sect has a bible of some kind. Even the Mormons have 
one which was discovered in New York state some years ago. It 
is very common indeed to find sacred writings and books of 
revelation. Whether our God is better than other peoples' gods, 
or whether our Bible is better or worse than the sacred books of 
other peoples, is a matter of opinion, and we shall not attempt to 
settle that question just now. As to our plan of salvation and 
our theory of sin, we do differ very much from any other sect, 
but there have been many mediators and saviors' of men besides 
Christ, and he was not the only one who was believed to be the 
son of God. According to Greek and Roman mythology, which 
is as authentic as bibles usually are, many heroes and some kings 
were believed to be sons of gods. There is nothing at all anoma- 
lous about such a belief. 

It happens that we are not left to conjecture on the question 
of the true character of our Bible. We know, as a matter of 
history, just how it was made, or where it was found ; or rather, 
we are not left in doubt as to its true origin. It was not made or 
found — it grew, and it is growing still. Every change that is 
made in this book — and changes have been numerous enough 
even in recent times — is a step in its growth. Our Bible is not 
to-day what it was fifty or a hundred years ago, to say nothing 
of what it was five hundred or a thousand years ago. And if we 
go back to the time of Christ, the change would appear still more 
striking. Christ never saw our Bible. He knew nothing of our 
Bible — indeed, there was no such book in existence until hun- 
dreds of years after Christ's crucifixion. 

As we come to get a closer insight into the true nature of 
religion, we find that it is simply man's conception of the world. 
It is to some extent the result of the teachings of man, but its 
direction is largely determined by surroundings and external 
influences. Every country and every people -has its own religion, 
because it has its own thoughts and its own ideas of nature. As 
men differ, their religions will differ ; and as times change, both 
men and religions will change likewise. Besides, every religion 
is a modification or development of some antecedent religion. 
It is a well known fact that no religion, no feature, no event of 
any kind, stands out independent and alone. Nothing is anom- 
alous, nothing is unique. So, before we have law, we must have 
government to enforce law ; and before we can have govern- 
ment, we must haye a well-established belief in some superior 
being, or we must trust in some religious principles on which 
government may be founded. Hence it is that in all civilized 



RELIGION. 



61 



countries, religion is fundamental and it is the first thing taught 
or learned. People who rule can only do so by referring to some 
authority on which they base their claims ; and whence could sucli 
authority come, if not from the Supreme Ruler of the universe ? 

When people enter this world, they find it obscure and mys- 
terious. Among the first things that they do is to ask questions ; 
they seek to know the reason and cause of things, and they im- 
mediately rush to the conclusion that there must be found some- 
where some great First Cause ! To this First Cause they give 
the name of God. It is well known that all peoples make their 
own gods, and that gods never make men. God is a pure con- 
ception and nothing more, and as conceptions vary in different 
minds, so gods and religions vary. In a word, religion is simply 
the result of man's effort to explain the mysteries of this world. 
Having fashioned his God to suit his own notions, he immedi- 
ately starts out to imagine or conceive what this God has done 
and how he proceeded in his operations. The first great per- 
formance would naturally be to make the world, and we find as 
we examine the history of religions, that no two accounts of 
this world-making agree. The God of the Christians made the 
world out of nothing — but that method is really quite excep- 
tional, and there are several other methods much better than 
that. 

Tradition helps along wonderfully in the construction of a 
religion, but mainly it is a work of imagination on the part of 
the devotee or his teacher. Even though a man gets some infor- 
mation on this point from his ancestors, everything at last must 
be run through his mind, as a grist goes through the mill, so that 
it may be fashioned at last in strict accordance with his own 
peculiar notions of truth and propriety. The ancients had a 
tendency, seemingly irresistible, to personify the qualities of ob- 
jects. In fact they did not so much observe the things them- 
selves as they did the qualities of things. If they saw an object 
move, they naturally formed the conclusion at once that it was 
impelled through some concealed agency, some spirit. Ac- 
cording to the men of other days, spirits, as well as gods, which 
are nothing more nor less than spirits, are everywhere. From 
the standpoint of those people, there are no inanimate objects. 
They never suspected for a moment that because they could not 
see or hear or touch things, these things did not exist. We do 
the same thing ourselves, though in a different direction and to 
a more limited extent. We idolize and deify a host of objects, 
and because we deify them, we adore them or worship them. 
We have our goddess of Liberty in the form of a handsome girl. 
We have our Devil, who has numberless forms and shapes in 



62 



RELIGION. 



which he presents himself, varying in all cases according to the 
fancy or genius of the individual by whom he is pictured. It 
must not be forgotten that the Devil is never painted as he really 
is, but only as he appears to our imagination. He is simply Evil 
ia a personified form — that is all the Devil there is or ever has 
been. The devils that Luther saw and contended with, like the 
snakes in the boots of people who have the delirium tremens, 
were creatures of the imagination. We have Cupid still, as the 
Greeks and Romans had the same god. We paint angels and 
give them shapes which vary according to the fertility of our 
imagination. We have Christ also whom we deify and idolize ; 
and the Catholics have a multitude of lesser divinities, among 
them being the saints and the Virgin Mary. Really, we have as 
much idolatry in the present age as people had four thousand 
years ago — though the habiliments are different and the forms 
presented appear more or less diversified. We personify war, 
nature, time, the seasons, virtue, goodness, especially in poetry, 
and we treat them in all respects as if we were addressing sen- 
tient beings. Did the Greeks and Romans go any farther? If 
not, why should we condemn them for their idolatry, or com- 
plain of them because of the gods they chose to worship? 

But there was a vast difference between the nature and pur- 
poses of the Greek religion and the nature and purposes of the 
Christian religion. The Greeks had a great multitude of divin- 
ities, perhaps 30,000 in all. Each one had his or her especial de- 
partment. For them, there was no real god of the universe — 
there was no god for the Greek people specially, as opposed to 
the gods of other people. Jupiter was indeed father and king, 
but he was not the supreme ruler. He was not the only heavenly 
king. He was neither omnipotent nor omnipresent. He was a 
department god ; he had the air and the earth for his especial 
care, while Neptune was god of the sea, and Pluto presided over 
the infernal regions. 

With the ancient Greeks, religion was the pure and honest 
worship of celestial powers. They looked upon certain gods as 
their protectors and benefactors, and it was natural that they 
should seek to appease these deities by offering to them services 
and sacrifices. All religions are based upon the principle of fear, 
and the religion of the ancients was certainly no exception in this 
regard. Their whole worship was an effort to propitiate deities 
whose favors they desired or whose wrath they dreaded. The 
state was also interested in this worship of the gods — as states 
always are — and the theory was that the state would suffer 
damage for the shortcomings or misdoings of the people in 
connection with the worship of the gods. Thus, the state was 



RELIGION. 



Go 



regarded solely as a source of protection for both the public and 
the individual. With man in his relations to other men, the 
state did not interfere. Neither did religion interfere with pri- 
vate affairs. Whether a man had performed his whole duty to 
the gods, and indirectly to the state, was the sole question raised 
in regard to his conduct. The religion of the ancients had noth- 
ing to do with ethics. There was no code of morals emanating 
from that source. There were no sacred writings, no scriptures, 
no written laws. There was only the controlling influence of 
custom and tradition in this direction. The ancients, it will be 
remembered, revered and adored their ancestors who were really 
the original gods. The case is very different to-day ; our people 
have but little use for their ancestors, either those of a remote 
or those of a recent date, and they care very little indeed about 
the lessons to be learned from the experience of the past. 

Laws for the ancients were made not by gods but by men — 
by such esteemed personages as Homer, Solon, Lycurgus, Socra- 
tes, Plato, Pericles and Aristotle. There was no sham or pre- 
tence in those days ; things were found to be what they seemed 
to be. Hypocrisy as a growth belongs to a later age — sham and 
shoddy are comparatively of recent date. These men that we 
have named were regarded as the interpreters of nature, and 
what they taught was accepted by the people as the undoubted 
truth. People in those days had confidence in their leading men 
and they were willing to concede that such men were wiser 
than themselves. 

In the religion of the ancients, there were no designs upon 
the state, and there were no complaints on either side about 
encroachments that were not warranted. Each class kept within 
its own realm. Politics, as well as philosophy, was considered 
to be something that had no connection with the dogmas or 
doctrines of religion. 

The Greeks and Romans, and the ancients generally, did 
not have religion in the sense in which we at the present day 
understand that term. They did not look to religion to discover 
moral laws which were to govern men in the conduct of life. 
Morality, as already intimated, came from custom, from tradi- 
tion and from the rules laid down by the fathers. Of the world 
to come they knew little, and for it they cared less. They lived 
for this world, and they gave themselves no concern about their 
fate when they reached the other side. They did not believe in 
immortality as we do : so they had no Messiah to worship and 
they embraced no doctrine of salvation. They worshiped their 
ancestors because they did not really consider them dead ; and 
while the latter had crossed the river, as they knew, they believed 



64 



RELIGION. 



that they still retained an interest in the affairs of the living and. 
that to a certain extent they had control over their fate. If they 
had thought that their fathers were really dead, they would not 
have worshiped them as they did daily. All the use which the 
Greeks and Romans had for their gods was found in the services 
which they imagined that the latter could render them in this 
life. They believed in no heaven or hell in our sense ; their 
heaven and hell were in this world, and their gods, though in- 
visible, were their daily companions. Such gods were worth 
having. Their divinities were far more sensible and more sevice- 
able to men than our God who is omnipresent and hence is never 
in any one particular place when he is wanted. The only god 
that really deserves to be worshiped is one who can always be 
found when he is needed. 

The religion of the Egyptians was not materially different 
from the religions of the Greeks and Romans. In fact it was the 
parent of both. Like these races, the Egyptians believed in the 
survival of the dead and in the actual continuance of life in this- 
world. They knew nothing of a resurrection ; for those who are 
not dead, no resurrection is needed. All these nations believed 
that the gods directed the every-day affairs of the people, and so 
they consulted the oracles and auguries to see what they had 
better do in a certain contingency. They were ready to abandon 
at once any undertaking, if they happened to find that the omens 
were not favorable. They believed, as we do, in signs and luck, 
though to a much greater extent. 

CHRISTIANITY. 

In entering upon an inquiry into the history and develop- 
ment of Christianity, the first fact to be borne in mind is that the 
Christian religion owes very little of its present form and char- 
acteristics to the teachings of our Saviour. As a reformer his 
career was brief, and so far as his teachings are concerned, their 
influence upon the world must be considered small indeed. Very 
little of what Christ said or taught has been treasured up, and 
the evidence in regard to the authenticity of what he is reported 
to have said, is, to say the least, very unsatisfactory. He wrote 
nothing himself, and we must wait till we come down to Paul's 
time before we have anything reliable in this connection. In 
fact the Christian religion may be said to date from Paul as the 
real founder, rather than from Christ himself who merely gave 
his name to a sect and poured out his blood to save a portion of 
mankind. Paul, it will be remembered, wrote and taught some 
time after Christ, and he never saw the Saviour. 



i 



RELIGION. 



65 



The Mahometan religion had the Koran on which to rear its 
proud structure. The Koran contained the doctrines of Ma- 
homet, and in this book they were clearly enunciated. The 
religion of Zoroaster was also founded upon scriptures that are 
still read and admired even by those who are not converts to that 
belief. So there are the written teachings of Buddha in India 
and of Confucius in China. It is by no means anomalous to find 
the Christian religion founded upon the teachings of one or more 
men. In fact all religions, when fully understood, will be found 
to have their origin in the agency of man. 

When we speak of the Christian religion, we mean the 
Christian religion as men know it, see it and understand it to- 
day — and not as it was known and seen and understood ten, 
twenty or a hundred years ago. But what it is to-day is not 
what it was in Christ's time, nor even what it was when Paul 
died. The fact should never be overlooked or forgotten that 
Christianity is a product of twenty centuries of growth, and each 
succeeding day it is somewhat different from what it was the 
day before. So that when we assume to speak of Christianity, 
the question that properly arises is this : What Christianity is 
meant? Of what age, what sect, what form? The whole world 
has contributed to make Christianity what we find it to-day. It 
is simply one of Time's latest and most important achievements. 
Of course Christ and his disciples did much to give birth to this 
new faith, and Paul and his followers did still more. Very much 
has been done to give it character and standing by decrees of 
councils, rulings of popes and edicts of kings. The dreams or 
visions of saints and divines have had a great influence upon the 
character and form of Christianity, and in many instances the 
views of those holy men have been incorporated with the sacred 
writings and have become a part of the divine law. 

As already intimated, only a little, a very little, of what we 
recognize as Christianity to-day came from Christ, or even from 
Paul. Our holy Sabbath, on which we place such great stress, 
is not based upon what Christ or Paul taught, but upon a decree 
of the Emperor Constantine, a potentate who was a Christian 
only by conversion, and that at a very late day in his earthly 
career. Does any one imagine that if Christ or Paul came down 
to dwell among our people at the present day, he would rec- 
ognize the Christian religion as something he had known or 
heard of in the remote past ? Most assuredly not. It would take 
either Christ or Paul several years to learn the mysteries and 
peculiarities of our religion as we have it at the present time. 
We apprehend that they would both feel anything but at home 
among our latter-day Christians. What would most surprise 



66 



RELIGION. 



and amaze them, we think, would be the odd way we have of 
worshiping God in our churches on Sunday. 

It must also be remembered that there are a great many 
different forms and phases of Christianity — as many forms and 
phases, indeed, as there are sects and sections, nay, as many 
forms and phases as there are individuals who profess this belief. 
How unreasonable it is to speak of a Christian religion or the 
Christian religion, as if there were only one ! Which form shall 
we take as a standard ? Which is the only true and acceptable 
Christianity of all the different kinds that we find in our midst ? 
Is it the Protestant form or the Catholic form ; is it the Metho- 
dist phase or the Baptist phase, is it the Greek church or the 
Latin church ? Which is it? They cannot all present the true 
form of the Christian religion, though that is what they all 
pretend. To the writer, one form seems to be as good and as true 
as the other, and no one of them is quite what it ought to be. 

Now let us inquire farther : How did Christianity spread ? 
How did it ever come, from such feeble beginnings, to acquire such 
a remarkable power on earth as we find that it now possesses ? 
As already seen, it was a product of slow and steady growth. 
It made its appearance at an opportune moment, as everything 
does that is valuable and lasting. It came just as the Roman 
empire was on its decline and when the people had wearied of 
slavery, superstition and sacrifices. It came when the whole 
civilized world had become disgusted with Paganism, with all 
its trickery and deception. All decent people of that day ab- 
horred its baseness and its pollution, and they were looking for 
something better in its stead. There was much to appeal to the 
hearts of the common people in the so-called teachings of Christ. 
It gave them consolation and comfort where they had found 
only sufferings and sorrows before. If there was no relief from 
the tyranny of their oppressors in this world, there was relief in 
the land of promise just on the other side of Jordan. Only a 
few years, perhaps a few weeks, or a few days, and then they 
would be accepted of Jesus and rejoice forever ! Wonderful 
conception, beautiful indeed the thought — if a person could only 
rely upon the realization of such a splendid dream ! However, 
it answered a want and satisfied the yearning of the down- 
trodden masses of those days — and that is how it came that Chris- 
tianity has risen and spread as it has done down to the present day. 
Christianity was a political rather than a religious innovation. 

At first, and for a long time, even for centuries, Christianity 
was a doctrine accepted only by the poor, the feeble, the sorrow- 
ing and the afflicted. Christianity in its inception was the poor 
man's religion — and even to-day the rich and the powerful have 



RELIGION. 



07 



little use for any of Christ's teachings. They go to church oc- 
casionally, it is true, but merely as a matter of form, or perhaps 
through pride. The rich have always liked Paganism better, 
with its pomp, parade and splendor. But truth is mighty and 
will prevail. All it wants is time, and so it was with Christianity 
which was truth for the time being. At first kings and emperors 
tried punishment and persecution, instruments which such peo- 
ple have always at command and are prompt to apply ; but these 
remedies are never effective, and they certainly did not succeed 
in this instance. The more bitterly and more relentlessly the 
Christians were persecuted, the more numerous and more power- 
ful they became. The people finally triumphed, and the mon- 
archs themselves had to succumb. These rulers, having 
changed from opposers, finally became converts themselves ; 
or they pretended to be converts, because they wished to be 
with the people and have themselves arrayed on the popular 
side. They accepted the forms at least of the new religion, if 
they did not endorse its doctrines in fact. From this time on . 
the alliance between the church and the state went on apace, 
and this union has continued down to the present moment. 

By this alliance with the state, the church gained in power, 
but it lost in character. In its primitive purity, Christianity, as 
Christ and Paul had taught its doctrines, disappeared forever. 
In the hands of kings and court people Christianity became, as 
we might expect, merely a modified Paganism, and so it has 
remained' down to the present day. It will be conceded by every 
intelligent inquirer that all the parade and processions, all the 
splendor, all the sacrifices, the libations and the ceremonies that 
are found to-day connected in any form with the worship of 
the Almighty God belong most emphatically to Paganism. 

The state, all over the civilized world, makes use of the 
church simply as an instrument with which to carry out its 
unholy projects and purposes. Cast your eye slowly and care- 
fully over the Christian nations of the world at this time, and 
you will find the church tenderly gathered under the wing of the 
state in every instance, and the state itself profiting by the high 
character which the church lends to the combination. It will 
be remembered that Christ and Paul would have nothing to do 
with the state and government, and the early Christians for at 
least three hundred years took the same ground. But latter-day 
Christians, we are sorry to say, take an entirely different view of 
the matter. They find a great deal of good in the state, and they 
can hardly get enough of it. Indeed, what could this ill-matched 
couple do without each other, the state without the church, or 
the church without the state ? They would both go down in 



68 



RELIGION. 



short order. The state would be destitute of any rightful claim, 
and the church would be without even a semblance of power. 
The state is founded on the church ; the church is founded on the 
Bible : and the Bible is founded on tradition ! No wonder the 
foundations of the state totter. It is well known that every man 
who is a ruler maintains his position only so long as he represents 
God, and only so far as he can prove that his credentials come 
direct from that heavenly source. A state without a church would 
be a monstrosity ; and a church without a state to give it sup- 
port, protection and prestige, would be a nonentity. 

In this connection we may consider farther the question as 
to how Europe became christianized. In the early centuries, 
notably the second, third and fourth, many Christians fled from 
persecution in Rome and Italy and settled in the country of the 
Gauls and Germans. They became missionaries, spreading the 
new doctrine among those who were known at that time as bar- 
barians, and they were very successful in making converts. It 
was not long before the new faith had gained quite a following ; 
and after the conversion of Emperor Constantine, and Chris- 
tianity had become established in Rome, bishops were settled in 
Gaul, and the old Pagan belief, even in those remote regions, 
began slowly to decline. Monasteries were established not only 
in Gaul but in Great Britain, and the work of conversion went 
on, chiefly through missionaries, not only in those countries, 
but among the Saxons and Germans. 

But the first great progress that was made by Christianity in 
Europe was under Charlemagne, king of the Franks, in the 
eighth and ninth centuries. Charlemagne must be looked upon 
as the real founder of Christianity in Europe — one of the greatest 
Christianizers and civilizers that the world has yet known. Like 
Alexander the Great and Mahomet, he was a conqueror ; he had 
but one instrument with which to enforce his ideas, and that 
was the sword. His mission, like that of all conquerors, was to 
kill and exterminate his enemies ; and the only remedy that he 
knew for the evils of the world was to remove all those that did 
not gather themselves under his banner. It is a surprising fact 
that all religions make their principal progress in this way. It 
is not pretended that killing a man really converts him, but his 
sudden disappearance has a very perceptible effect upon the 
minds of those who survive. This was Mahomet's method, and 
it proved to be remarkably successful. People have short mem- 
ories, and after they have once been converted, they soon forget 
how it happened. 

Charlemagne was a barbarian, a rough and cruel messenger 
of fate. On one side he pushed back the followers of Mahomet, 



RELIGION. 



69 



and on the other side he crushed the Saxons. He disciplined and 
Christianized all with whom he came in contact, but at a fearful 
cost. He was a terrible master, a merciless conqueror. The 
number of Saxon prisoners that he killed in one day is reported 
to have been 4,500. This is an exemplification of the means by 
which the Christian religion was enabled to gain a foothold in 
Europe. 

Charlemagne aided the Pope, and the Pope aided Charle- 
magne in return — fair sample, it was, of the church and state as 
we uniformly find them associated. Pope Leo III. placed a 
crown upon the monarch's head and gave him the proud name 
of Charles Augustus, Emperor of the Romans ! It is evident 
enough that Christ never dreamed of any such alliance as that 
which we have under consideration — a union of his followers 
with the robbers and murderers of the world. Charles led the 
advance in this direction, and in the example that he set, he has 
no doubt been imitated a thousand times since. Union of the 
church and state — sometimes differing on minor points, and some- 
times even entering into contention, but always remaining allies and 
loyal to each other to the last. Neither seems to forget for a mo- 
ment that the one is absolutely indispensable to the other. 

Charlemagne built great temples— and one which he considered 
grand was located at his home in Aix-la-Chapelle. It stands 
there yet, a queer shaped building having an octagonal form 
on the inside ; and not far away from the church is the statue 
of Charles in the public square in front of the City Hall, where 
the palace originally stood. History speaks of Charlemagne, as 
it does of most monarchs, as of more than ordinary stature and 
of a noble and commanding appearance. But the statue of 
Charlemagne to-day represents him as rather short and stoop- 
shouldered, and in appearance anything but imposing. Whether 
it is the fault of Charles Augustus himself or of the sculptor, we 
are not able to say. He holds out a small globe in his hand as 
if he were making an offering to some one. Louis XIV. was 
also represented as a big man, though when he died and his 
clothes were removed, he was found to be not so grand after all. 
Clothes help a king along in appearance amazingly. Indeed, 
clothes are the biggest half of most monarchs. If there ever 
was a case with but a single step from the sublime to the ridicu- 
lous, it is in the case of the transition from a monarch in his robes 
to the man as nature made him. 

But without reference to the stature of Charles, there is no 
question at all about the fact that his crimes exceeded all ordi- 
nary proportions. He was a bold, bad man, and if he was saved, 
there is hope for other rascals. He furnished a type that has 



70 



RELIGION. 



been repeated in history many, many times since. Everything- 
and anything, no matter how cruel or how wicked, if it were 
only done for God and the church ! So it has ever been ; and so 
it is to-day, though to a less extent. Like most bad men, Charle- 
magne did a great deal of good, but whether that is to be counted 
to his credit, is a matter about which there is some question. 
Quite certain it is, we cannot justly call a man good simply be- 
cause he occasionally does a good deed. A truly good man is 
one who is good without intermission, who does no bad deeds at 
any time, and who is incapable of wickedness under any circum- 
stances. 

In this connection we quote a paragraph from Herder's 
Philosophy of History : How were conquered peoples converted 
to the Christian religion in the early ages? " Often through fire 
and sword, through secret tribunals and exterminating wars. 
Let no one say that the Roman bishop did not occasion these 
things ; he approved of them, enjoyed their fruits, and when- 
ever he could, he imitated them. Hence those courts of Inquisi- 
tion, at which psalms were sung, and those Crusades for con- 
version, in the booty of which popes, princes, orders, lords and 
priests participated. Those who were not killed became slaves 
and they remain such to this day. So has Christian Europe 
been founded. So kingdoms were established, consecrated as 
they were by the pope ; and later on the cross of Christ was 
carried as a murder-sign into distant parts of the world." And, 
sad to say, this is all true, being only a portion of the truth at that. 

MAHOMETANISM. 

Christianity and Mahometanism, two branches of one and 
the same religion, are in every essential respect different 
systems from those that prevailed in Greece and Rome. The 
ancients were polytheistic, and they were exceedingly tolerant 
toward other religions. But the Christians and Mahometans be- 
lieve in one God, who is their God exclusively, and they insist 
that all other gods are spurious and contemptible. Their doc- 
trine is that there is no God but Allah— Christ being the prophet 
for one branch and Mahomet for the other. There is no material 
difference between the doctrines of our Old Testament and the 
doctrines of Mahometanism, except that the latter is of later date 
and has Mahomet for its prophet. Both systems are Semitic in 
character, and naturally they are adapted to the wants and tastes 
of the Semitic peoples. Both religions are intensely aggressive, 
and the power, finally, upon which they both depend is the 
sword. The Christian religion as we recognize it began with 



RELIGION. 



71 



wars and conquests precisely as was done by Mahomet and his 
followers. Their aim was, and to a certain extent is to-day, to 
subdue the world and force it to accept their own particular 
creed. All races who refused to submit and who would not wor- 
ship this one God, Allah, were infidels, and as such they must be 
persecuted and finally destroyed. That is the spirit that moves 
both Mahometans and Christians, even in this progressive and 
enlightened age of ours. Their motto is conversion or extermina- 
tion. If we hear less of these tilings now than we did in the 
time of the Inquisition, it is simply because we hear less of 
Christianity itself, and people find other things more interesting 
and of greater importance. 

Mahometanism, like Christianity, is founded on written law. 
Both have a Bible — sacred writings filled with dogmas and ordi- 
nances which the faithful are determined to have enforced upon 
mankind, even if the effort costs their lives. These systems are 
properly the foundation of modern government and the original 
source of state law. It is well known that our state authority is 
established wholly upon religious authority. Mahometanism 
will be better understood if we regard it in its true light, as an 
off-shoot of the Jewish religion. 

These two religions, Christianity and Mahometanism, are 
founded upon the basis of authority, and their sacred books are 
made up substantially of commands and ordinances. The be- 
lievers in these doctrines assume the infallibility of their God, 
and upon that foundation they build their whole structure — they 
are right and everybody else is wrong, they are pure and good, 
and everybody else is sinful. It is merely an ingenious system 
by which men are converted into slaves of God in the first place,' 
and into slaves of men afterward. Their slavery to God is a delu- 
sion, but slavery to men is a painful reality. It is " benevolent 
assimilation " put into successful operation. The doctrine 
amounts to this: "You do as I say, sacrifice to me, love 
me, worship me, and I will engage to protect you." To this the 
feeble creature cheerfully assents, and he sells his poor misguided 
soul for a mere promise which is never fulfilled. Behold the origin 
of our present state ! If we did not have our Holy Bible and the 
Koran, we do not believe that men would ever have thought of 
having a state and a government. Certain it is, all the states 
now in existence in civilized lands are founded upon doctrines 
taught in these two books. The type, the arch-ruler, the father 
of all our despots, is Allah. Humility, blind obedience and sacri- 
fice are perpetually enjoined as the sole medium of salvation.* 
Such a system of religion is opposed to all reason, and it ought 
not to be a cause of wonder that men of sense and intelligence at 



7 -J 



RELIGION. 



the present time should generally reject these doctrines, in whole 
or in part, and that the closer they examine the subject and the 
more they revolve the question in their minds, the more deter- 
mined they should become in this rejection. 

As already noticed, our Bible, like the Koran, is made up 
substantially of commands, except that large portion which is 
devoted to ancient history ; but all commands are valueless and 
destitute of power. We have the doctrine of force taught in one 
part of the Bible, and the blessed doctrine of love without force 
in another. It is evident enough that this house is divided 
against itself, and therefore it cannot stand forever. Curiously 
indeed, we follow the Old Testament in practice and the New 
Testament in theory. Our state is founded wholly upon the Old 
Testament, and the doctrines of the New Testament are practi- 
cally ignored. Men to-day worship not the God of Love but the 
God of Wrath and Revenge. Just where God ends and where 
the Devil starts in, it is rather hard to decide. 

SALVATION. 

The doctrine of divine grace and redemption as it has de- 
veloped in connection with the Christian religion is well worth 
the serious consideration of every thoughtful person. How 
shall a man be saved? How shall he escape the just penalty 
of the sins he has committed ? Not by his good works, not by 
his sacrifices, not by his propitiatory acts of any kind ; for it is 
clearly seen that after a sin is committed, there is no remedy and 
no known contrivance by which a man can escape the just 
penalty of his transgressions. This is nature's law, as well as 
God's law. If a man is rash enough to jump over a precipice, he 
must expect to suffer the consequences of his folly. After the 
penalty is incurred, there can be no remedy, no preventative of 
anykind. If a man violates the laws of health, he must expect 
to suffer for his temerity. Prayers will avail him not, neither 
will propitiatory acts or sacrifices of any character. 

But the New Testament teaches a new and strange doctrine 
in this connection, and one that it is hard for a reasoning and 
reflecting man to accept. That men have sinned, and must sin, 
is conceded to be true ; and if they have sinned, there is no known 
method of escaping the penalty incurred. This was the doctrine 
that prevailed throughout the world up to the time of Christ, 
over nineteen hundred years ago. It is the doctrine still held 
among men who reflect and whose belief is formed according to 
the principles that are accepted as sound at the present day. 
But since the coming of Christ, we have a new faith, a new doc- 



RELIGION. 



in 



trme taught. It had been granted that when penalties are in- 
curred, the judgment must be carried out without any possi- 
bility of escape to the sinner. But now there comes an innova- 
tion that has no parallel in the history of the world. God comes 
forward, and for some unaccountable reason he abandons the 
part that he has taken all along — that of the just and inexorable 
judge — and he takes the burden of man's sins upon his own 
shoulders ! He had already entered judgment in the case, and 
declared the penalty incurred by the sinner, but from the year 
one, over nineteen centuries since, he started out in an entirely 
new direction and adopted a new plan of action. Mystery of 
mysteries ! What did he propose to do ? Why, he proposed to 
relieve men from the penalty already incurred, and for the sins 
that had been committed he offered to take the burden, the 
blame and the suffering, upon himself. Miralnle ! Was there 
ever a judge like that before ? 

But, we regret to say, the facts hardly support the theory 
that has been advanced in this case. God, the Father, did not 
really sacrifice himself, and perhaps he never pretended that he 
would — there is an evident misunderstanding about this business 
somewhere. Such a course would have been inexplicable. But as 
a matter of fact, it was not the father that was sacrificed for the 
sins of man, as has been so often stated, but his only begotten 
son. That was quite another thing, and not so very remarkable 
nor so very anomalous. Things of that kind have happened be- 
fore, and they will no doubt happen again. Fathers have re- 
peatedly offered up their sons as a sort of atonement for the 
blunders that they, the fathers, had committed in their early 
career. But what could have been God's motive — for even gods 
have motives? In this case the incentive seems to have been 
love. God so loved the world that he gave his only begotten 
son. But did he love the world as a whole, or only a certain 
part of it ? No, God did not love the whole world — such is not 
the nature of love in any case. God only loved a few chosen 
and favored ones. He loved those that loved and served him, 
and he hated the remainder. He did not sacrifice for all the 
world, but for this particular few who constituted a sort of select 
party acting on their own account. Such is love uniformly. God's 
love in this case was by no means disinterested. 

But we must judge of the sacrifice of Christ as we would 
judge of any sacrifice in every-day life. Was it just, was it 
rational? Is there anything natural or reasonable about the 
whole story ? No, it was not just, neither was it rational in any 
respect. It was not even possible, and such a thing evidently 
could never have happened. Every sacrifice is unjust and irra- 



74 



RELIGION. 



tional, and the sacrifice of Christ is remarkably so. To make so 
pure a being as Christ suffer as the scape-goat to save the wicked 
beings of this world from the penalty which they had incurred, 
is a monstrous case of cruelty and injustice, and mankind should 
cease to regard it as an event that really belongs to the history 
of this world. It is not a desirable picture to present to the view 
of men. When people come to witness an exhibition of wrong- 
doing too frequently, they finally fail to see any harm in the 
performance. If God sacrificed his son, his only son, why should 
not other fathers sacrifice their sons, especially in an emergency? 
It is not well to sacrifice even a lamb, first, because it is cruel to 
the lamb, and second, because sacrifices do no good to any one 
save those who partake of the feast. If lambs were not good to 
eat, there would not be so many "sacrificed." We are glad to 
state that the prevailing sentiment to-day is not in favor of the 
practice of punishing the innocent in order that the guilty may 
escape. 

Many people to-day, perhaps most people, doubt whether 
there is or ever has been any saving or redeeming power in the 
blood of Christ. The whole thought is oriental, a pure fiction 
that finds little response in the hearts of intelligent people at the 
present time. However, like many other fictions, it has served 
its purposa, and it has had a wonderful influence upon the history 
of man. Such a story started to-day would find but few believers. 

It is now generally understood and agreed that vicarious 
suffering, either of the innocent for the guilty or of the guilty 
for the innocent, does not answer the purpose in any case. In- 
deed, sensible men do not believe in the efficacy of sacrifice 
under any circumstances. They do not believe in the need or 
propriety of punisliments to start with. If a man sins, that is, 
if he violates any provision or disregards any condition of na- 
ture, he must suffer for his error in his own person. It is not an 
age in which scape-goats flourish — they are certainly neither 
numerous nor popular. The penalty and the transgression must 
go together — they are inseparable. There is no interval of time 
to distinguish one from the other. 

And now let us inquire into the true nature and workings of 
grace. Grace can never be just. It is partiality, favoritism, and 
discrimination exhibited in a most repulsive form. It is not 
doing as we ought to be done by. It is punishing one man and 
allowing another man equally guilty to escape without punish- 
ment. It is not bringing all persons under one general and im- 
mutable law. It is offering a premium for wrong-doing, since 
no matter how sinful a man's conduct may be, he is saved be- 
cause some one else has atoned for his sins. It is contrary to all 



RELIGION. 



75 



the rules and revelations of nature that such should be the case. 

Grace is founded upon a theory of slavery. If men are sub- 
missive, obedient, humble, they will be favored, they will be 
pardoned. Otherwise they must suffer. But who wants to be a 
slave, who wants to be obligated by the favors of anybody ? A 
free and independent man does not desire grace, does not want 
pardon, because he feels that he has clone no wrong in the first 
place. He wants simple fairness and justice — nothing more. 
A bold, brave man does not want assistance ; he can help him- 
self. Moreover, he never does what he is ashamed of at any 
time. 

And what can grace effect in any case? It can heal no 
wounds ; it cannot help either the sinner or the one who has 
suffered injury at his hands. Nothing can heal wounds but time 
and nature. Grace certainly cannot remove the sinfulness of 
sin ; it cannot change its character in the slightest degree. Na- 
ture has no scape-goats. A man can send a substitute to war, 
but nature accepts nothing of the kind. 

There are many serious, even fatal, defects in the Christian 
scheme of salvation. Carried to its legitimate consequences, it 
is pernicious in its influence. The true doctrine would seem to 
be that a man should so live that he might have no need of salva- 
tion. If a man commits no offence, he has no need of being 
saved from punishment, since he has incurred no penalty. He is 
a free man, and having done no wrong, he has placed himself 
under obligations to no one, and therefore he needs no redemp- 
tion. But the Christian doctrine in the direction which it takes 
is quite different. It would seem to imply that there is some 
merit in sin, or at least that it is unavoidable, and therefore it is 
excusable. According to the Christian dispensation, what in- 
ducement is there for a man to be just and kind and wise ? 
Why should he strive to do good works? Following the teach- 
ings of Christ and Paul, and of the New Testament generally, 
with Luther's testimony thrown in on the same side, there is no 
value in good works. Faith, according to these authorities, not 
works, is the principal thing. "By grace ye are saved, not of 
works, lest any man should boast.'' Eph. n., 8-9. That is the point 
exactly, " lest any man should boast," that is, take some credit to 
himself and presume to be a man ! A doctrine that does not 
keep a man down and make him a good, obedient slave, to God 
in the first place, and to his governors and rulers in the second 
place, is not good Bible doctrine at any time. Religion binds, 
the word itself means to bind ; and it is nothing if it does not 
keep people in bondage. The idea that a man should do any- 
thing to save himself — the only way certainly by which he ever can 



16 



RELIGION. 



be saved — is rejected with symptoms not only of indignation 
but even of wrath. A high biblical authority says: ''Faith 
stands opposed to all works " — and that is most assuredly the 
case. If a man undertakes to work out his own salvation by 
doing as a sensible and worthy man should, he shows clearly 
enough that he has lost faith in God and gone to another doctor. 
By the way, nothing is more grasping, more exacting, more 
suspicious than faith, especially Christian faith. Faith wants 
converts, faith wants power. Hence it is that heresy is treated 
by faith as high treason. Heresy leads to reduced numbers in 
the church, and this to a loss of power and perquisites. Ex- 
amine any religion carefully, and especially the Christian re- 
ligion, and you will find that the chief efforts of the church at 
all times center upon an increase of power. Is it any wonder that 
the Christian peoples are as a whole emphatically money- 
making peoples ? They seek wealth in order to acquire power. 

It is a great mistake indeed to suppose for a moment that 
good morals, or good conduct generally, comes from the Bible, 
even from the New Testament. As we have stated before, a 
man was not to be saved by his good works. It was assumed in 
the beginning that man was born wicked, and, on account of 
original sin, he must always remain wicked. Evil was believed 
to be something both necessary and proper. Indeed, we have a 
right to infer that if evil is necessary under God's reign, it must 
be proper. Christians rather seem to cultivate evil and glory in 
it, very much as the criminal courts do in regard to crimes. If 
there were no crimes, we should have no criminal courts, and if 
we had no evil to contend with, Christians would speedily go out 
of business. Before a man can be saved, the first condition is 
that he must be a sinner, and the more he is steeped in sin, the 
more certain he may be of ultimately wearing a crown and 
sitting at the right hand of God. Faith, humility, obedience — 
these are the heavenly virtues ; character is nothing. The ques- 
tion is not what you do, but whom do you acknowledge as God ? 
Whom do you worship? To which side are you loyal? Again, 
we repeat, goodness, in theory at least, has nothing to do with 
a man's being a good Christian, as it has nothing to do with a 
man's being a good citizen. A man is not good because he is a 
Christian in any case ; neither is he a Christian because he is 
good. There is no relation between the two. 

The terribly weak spot in Christianity, as in Mahometanism, 
is Fatalism — men must be bad, they must be miserable, and they 
could not be good or even comfortable if they tried! But we know 
that this assumption is not founded in fact. Everybody knows 
that there are plenty of good men outside of the church, as well 



RELIGION. 



77 



as in the church, though we are willing to admit that the church 
has nothing to do with the matter in either case. We note here 
another serious mistake made by most men. They think that 
Christianity must be good because there are good things in the 
Bible. So it is imagined generally that a people are good be- 
cause the laws under which they live are good. Is a man good 
because he obeys a good law — or a good master ? Most certainly 
not. There is no virtue in obedience — rather the contrary. 
There is virtue in resistance, but none in obedience. Cowards 
are always submissive ! It must be remembered that there is 
absolutely no power in a command, more than there is in a spot 
of ink or a puff of wind. The character of laws, either those 
which are human or those which are divine; affords no proof of 
what the people are who recognize the laws. A law may be 
recognized, and yet not be obeyed. The most of our laws, those 
of God as well as those of men, are disregarded. The only laws 
that have any influence upon a man's conduct are those which 
he himself makes for himself. The people as a mass never have 
the privilege of making laws, but in vetoing or negativing laws, 
they are remarkably successful. In fact no man ever obeys any law 
unless he chooses. 



By way of review of what has been said on this subject, we 
may call attention to a few points in order to enable the reader 
to get a clearer insight into the nature and workings of religion 
and finally to understand its development. The source from 
which religion is derived must be evident enough to every 
thoughtful person. It is a growth, a product which it has taken 
ages to mature, and in no sense is it a creation. It is derived 
from three leading sources : fear, ignorance and imagination. 
Instead of coming from a single source, from God as is claimed, 
it comes from an indefinite number of sources, a fact that is 
rendered evident by the number and variety of religions found 
upon the earth, as well as by their continued change and de- 
velopment in each individual case. If religion came from 
Heaven, or from any supernatural source, it would never change. 
It would be perfect from the beginning. It would be uniform in 
character, the same yesterday, to-day and forever. That men do 
alter and amend their religions constantly, and even abandon 
them entirely, when it comes to the last stage, is a fact that is 
in evidence every day. If men did not themselves make, con- 
trive and construct their own religion, they would never think of 



78 



RELIGION. 



mending it as they do and putting something different in its 
stead. 

Xo. there can be no possible mistake about this matter : 
Religion is born in the minds of men, and it is developed by their 
imaginations. It is seen by them as in a dream or vision, and no 
two peoples ever have the same dream or the same vision. All 
peoples have interpreters and prophets and medicine-men of their 
own, and they each give a different interpretation to the signs 
and appearances that are presented to their view. Some people 
have many gods, some have a few, and others have none at 
all. The form and features of no two gods belonging to any two 
peoples, it must be added, are ever painted, figured or described 
alike. 

Religion is the interpretation which man gives to nature's 
phenomena, and especially to the mysteries of creation. Every 
people, especially in their early days, have their medicine-men, 
their bards or poets, their singers and their prophets who make it 
their business to preserve, repair and reform the traditions of 
their ancestors. Before we had history and the printing press, we 
had bards and singers, whose office and employment it was to 
keep alive among the people the memories of the past. They ex- 
pressed in verse what the people themselves had come to believe. 
Behold the true origin of religion ! — poetry, songs, tradition, 
with quite a bit of ancient history added and handed down to 
posterity. This is what we find, and all that we find, in our own 
Bible — a confused mass of tradition and allegory. 

Religion, unquestionably, was not designed originally to re- 
form men or guide them, but merely, as we have intimated, to 
interpret the signs and to indicate to men the medicine that 
they should take, the ceremonies they must obseiwe and the 
sacrifices they must bring in order to avert evil and ensure suc- 
cess in the enterprises which they have in view. That is all 
there is of the essence of religion as it is found all over the 
world. Primitive peoples are excessively timid and appre- 
hensive, like the animals found in the forest, and they want pro- 
tection against evil and remedies to be used when emergencies 
arise. Such people are always worshiping the gods ; they are 
trying some kind of a remedy or going through some sort of per- 
formance in order to appease the deities and escape some 
threatened disaster. We are acting upon the same principle 
to-day in another direction. Men have great confidence in signs, 
charms and enchantments, and they are amazingly fond of medi- 
cine — medicine for this and medicine for that, medicine all the 
time ! This shows how foolish and superstitious some people still 
are. They really believe that it is through the doses that come 



RELIGION. 



70 



from the apothecary shop that God works his miracles at the 
present moment. Many people actually believe that if they can 
get some unusually offensive drug into their stomachs, they are 
pretty sure to be cured in short order. Originally people went 
to the priest when they were sick, but now they go to the doctor 
or send for his medicine. The doctor has become far more 
potent than the priests ever were, and he makes a great deal 
more money out of the business than they ever did. Formerly 
men sacrificed to the priests ; now they sacrifice to the doctor. 

After religion came to be an established institution, design- 
ing men soon found that it could be turned to their advantage in 
various ways The priests had their plans and they were not 
slow to perceive their opportunities. They soon saw that the 
more sacrifices there were, the more feasts they themselves would 
enjoy. Is it at all strange that priests always encourage 
sacrifices? Nothing could be more natural than such a course 
on their part. The men of state also perceived that religion 
afforded a powerful lever for the management and control of 
men, and they soon found it to their advantage to take the 
church under their fostering care. The church wanted protection 
and the state wanted favors — hence the holy alliance between 
the church and state which exists even to-day. They are able, 
unquestionably, to be of great service to each other. There is a 
natural affinity between the Pope and the king ; both are sover- 
eigns, and they are very much alike. Both want power, and 
both are human, intensely human. 

It is to be noticed that every religion is merely a continua- 
tion, a development, of some antecedent belief — with a change 
here and there, and occasionally a new idea added. A really 
new and unheard-of religion has never yet been known. Surely 
Christianity was not new, neither was Mahometanism new. 
Both are new only as a matter of form and as a curious combina- 
tion of notions. Every religion is the work of interpreters and 
artists — men who put things in shape and present simply their 
own views or conceptions of things. All creeds are patchwork, 
like a crazy quilt. All that is ethical in religions comes from 
editors, prophets and lawgivers, like Solon, Lycurgus, Confucius 
and men of their class. Whichever way we turn in our inquiries 
into the origin, nature and workings of religion, we find men — 
always men, but never God. If there is such a being as God, to 
this day he has succeeded in eluding the vigilance of his pur- 
suers and escaping into the dismal depths of the unknown. But 
instead of searching for God and inquiring into his nature and 
habits, why should men not determine first that there is a God ? 
In closing our inquiry into the character and influence of 



80 



RELIGION. 



Christianity, we must remark upon its failure to meet the wants 
of civilized men. So far as the teachings of Christ are con- 
cerned, they had no relation to such a condition of society as we 
find at present ; and it is little they could do towards guiding 
men in society or securing for them a contented and happy life. 
It should not be forgotten for a moment that for Christ the king- 
dom of God was near at hand, and that hence there was no need 
of providing for the morrow. In such a country as Palestine, at 
such a time as that in which Christ lived, with the world soon to 
come to an end, the life of a lounger was as proper as any other. 
There is no sense in people's working unless it is necessary, and 
in that case labor was not necessary. But such a course in such 
a land as ours, at this stage of the world, would land a man at no 
distant day either in jail or the poorhouse. For us. in this age, 
the Bible is not a reliable director or guide — it is no guide at all. 
If we wish to learn how we must do, or what we must do. to be 
saved — that is to say, how we may succeed in life — we must turn 
for counsel in some other direction and consult some other 
physician. 

Christianity is emphatically ascetic in all its teachings and 
tendencies. It in a religion of suffering and sorrow — most unneces- 
sarily and unreasonably so. Enjoyment, ease, comfort, content- 
ment is wicked, and the route on which these things are found 
leads down directly to purgatory and destruction. This is the 
true Christian doctrine, not only in theory but in practice : and 
if we want the proof, we have only to turn to Christianity as it 
was found in the Middle Ages from the fifth to the fifteenth 
centuries. We hear less of this asceticism now, because we hear 
less about religion of any kind, Christianity having now entirely 
lost its power over the ordinary citizen. According to true 
Christianity, everything is bad and everybody is bad. Things 
were bad in the beginning, and they have remained so ever 
since. According to the Bible, especially the New Testament, 
the Devil is a bigger god than the Almighty, and he is by far the 
more successful in accomplishing what he undertakes. Why 
should people not worship the Devil ? Very many do. 

Of course, if you make up your mind at the start that every- 
thing is bad and you keep talking about it continually, you will 
soon succeed in making yourself believe that things really are 
all awry ; and to believe that things are bad is, for you. precisely 
the same in effect as if they actually were so. Who shall esti- 
mate the misery produced in the world by an unfounded belief, 
like our Christian doctrine, in which the necessity and unavoid- 
ableness of human suffering and sacrifice is constantly incul- 
cated? All our misery comes from belief '. If we believe we are un- 



RELIGION. 



81 



happy and must b3 unhappy, why, most assuredly, we shall be, 
and we ought to be, unhappy. How could we be otherwise, 
since, as we have s lid, all suffering and sorrow comes from belief! 
If we shut ourselves up in darkness or refuse to open our eyes 
to the glorious light of the sun which shines for all, why should 
not the world appear dark and dismal to us in all its aspects, 
and continue so forever ? Sunshine is made for those only who 
open their eyes and for those who are both able and willing to. 
see. 



CHAPTER II. 
TRUTH AND THOUGHTS. 

Truth is something that we pick up by the way, retain for 
a time, and finally becoming tired of it, we drop it and take 
something else that pleases us better. 

Truth is what men believe ; everything for them is simply 
what they see and feel ; as people's beliefs change, truth for them 
also changes. For a long time the Copernican theory has been 
the prevailing doctrine for the civilized world, but some time 
hence something else will take its place. For many centuries 
the Bible contained laws by which men governed their action, 
because they believed that its pages contained the absolute 
truth. Now people look for truth in some other direction, usu- 
ally in some popular work of fiction. We have no truth really, 
we have only views of what we call truth. Every man has his 
own views, and one dogma succeeds another dogma until finally 
we have nothing but dogmas remaining. 

Our views of what is true and what is untrue are changing 
somewhat every day. The difference for a single day is not very 
perceptible, but the changes that occur in our views in twenty- 
five or fifty years are quite remarkable. Thus, our views on 
gravity or electricity are not to-day what they were a century 
or two centuries since. And so with beauty. What is beauty ? 
Is it something that really exists outside of ourselves, or is it 
merely what it is for us, what we believe, what we feel? What 
is hot or cold for us? Simply what feels hot or cold to us. But 
water that feels warm to us does not necessarily feel warm to 
others. All these questions depend upon certain conditions,, 
upon how we are and how we feel. 



82 



TRUTH AND THOUGHTS. 



Our opinions and conceptions are only for ourselves. Our 
conceptions concern ourselves and really concern no one else. 

People begin with a great misconception as to the nature of 
truth in the first place. They think it is everlasting and un- 
changeable ; that it is something not only for all time but for 
all peoples at the same time. That is not its character at all. 
Nothing is more variable and evanescent than truth. It is here 
to-day and somewhere else to-morrow ; it takes one form in one 
century and another in another century. It has as man}' hues 
as the chameleon. What is true in one country is false in all 
others ; and in the same country, what is accepted as truth at 
one time is certain not to be so accepted at another time. Truth 
is merely what people believe, and as they themselves change 
with time, their beliefs change likewise. When beliefs change, 
truth assumes for them a new form. When people cease to be- 
lieve in God, in divinities, in demons, their whole view of nature 
changes. 

We also have the erroneous impression that truth rules the 
world, that truth is all-powerful. As a matter of fact, trutmdoes 
not govern men either in public or private affairs. In the first 
place it must be borne in mind that what we consider truth is 
merely what we call truth. It may be truth in reality, and it 
may not. How shall the matter be determined ? Only by the 
opinions of men — there is no other standard — and every man has 
his own opinion, which differs more or less from the opinions of 
other people. Truth with us depends first of all upon proof. 
What is proof ? A most unreliable and unsubstantial matter. It 
is merely what we call proof, and what we call proof is never 
proof for others, at least not to the same extent. 

So far from truth's ruling this world, falsehood and fiction 
are factors far more potent in the affairs of men than truth. 
Even falsehood is just as powerful as fact, so long as it is be- 
lieved to be fact. Truth and lies are faced exactly alike, and 
that is the reason why it is so difficult to distinguish one from 
the other. A forged bill passes just as well as a genuine bill, so 
long as everybody believes it to be genuine. And really what is 
the difference between a forged and a genuine bill ? None at all. 
They are both made of the same paper, and they have equally 
fine work. The forged bill has every requisite and characteristic 
that belongs to a genuine bill, or it would not prove to be a suc- 
cess. Why, so exactly are they alike that experts are often un- 
able to say whether it is forged or not. What is a genuine bill ? 
A finely engraved sheet with signatures, and a forged bill is noth- 
ing less. 

How are people overcome, how are they convinced? By 



TRUTH AND THOUGHTS. 



83 



lies — always by lies. It is so in business, it is so in politics, it is 
so in religion, it is so in government. Everybody lies ! Lies ! 
Lies ! All lie ! If people really understood and appreciated the 
truth, they would not tolerate their kings and masters even for a 
day. But they are ready to believe a lie, and that makes them 
submissive and tractable. That is the kind of people that ambi- 
tious and designing men prefer. They like a peaceful, easy-going 
people, those who never resist, never protest, no matter what 
happens. 

Speaking about lies again, nobody is content to appear as he 
really is. Nothing could induce a man to come out in public in 
his pristine nakedness, and that is the reason why every man 
wears clothes. He exposes his hands and face, but that is a 
matter of necessity. Kings wear more clothes than people do 
ordinarily. Even savages paint and adorn themselves, in order 
to make themselves appear either more terrible or more beauti- 
ful than they really are. Bear in mind there is generally a lie, 
a deception, at the bottom of all that men do. 

We really do not know where you would go to find what is 
unquestionably true. Is it in the verdict of a petit jury or in the 
opinion of a court ? Their decisions are so often reversed that 
it cannot be that they are infallible. That a man is proved 
guilty in court, is absolutely no demonstration of his guilt. Is 
the Bible made up of truth exclusively ? We know better than 
that. What is taught as true in one part of this book is con- 
demned as falsehood in other parts. Besides, most of the vol- 
ume is confessedly made up of allegory. And how much 
truth is there in allegory ? As much as there is in the story 
of Sindbad the Sailor. Why, the very essence of allegory is 
that it should not be true. Is it in science that we shall 
find truth ? No, that cannot be, for science itself changes 
more frequently than the moon. Nothing is more uncertain, 
more unreliable than what we call science. Science is merely 
what men believe for the time being. But men change their 
beliefs, and hence science must change. 

How can there be any permanence in truth ? It would seem 
that there could be no possibility of question about the soundness 
of this position : That ten thousand years hence, perhaps five 
thousand years hence, or possibly two thousand years hence, not 
one proposition that we now consider to be unquestionably true 
will be accepted as such by the people who live and think in 
those days. Truth decays and dies, as everything decays and 
dies. Everything is merely for a time, and a very short time at 
the farthest. In those future ages which we have been consider- 
ing, the world will have new men, with new views, and they 



84 



TRUTH AND THOUGHTS. 



will have necessarily new sciences, new arts, a new philosophy, 
a new religion, and new beliefs all around. 

The question of what is truth is the question of what is 
anything or everything ? Truth is merely true views of things. 
There is a true and a false view of everything. What, for ex- 
ample, is good ? What is evil? They are as you look at the subject. 
Neither has any other character than what you give it. They 
change as you change and when you die they disappear and dis- 
turb you no more. Unquestionably, they exist nowhere except 
in the imagination of man. Bad things are merely those that 
we do not like. But there are and there must be things that 
people do not like, and hence there must be what we call evil. 
It is merely a matter of feeling, wishes, interests. Good and 
evil are merely the different ends of the same thing. Good is 
what we like, as bad is what we dislike. Righteous and moral 
are also conceptions of the same character. They are what 
please us and come up to our views of propriety. People change 
their views, and so their ideas of morality and righteousness 
change. What is moral in one place is not necessarily moral in 
another. 

We are continually talking about things just and true. 
There are no such things in fact, or if they do exist, they are 
only the one-sided views of men. It is only a question of more 
or less, or what you compare with. What is true for one is false 
for another ; what is just to one is unjust to another, what is 
good for one man is usually an injury to another. 

We always start on a false basis, especially in considering 
new questions. We start with suppositions, with assumptions, 
hypotheses and theories — with things that are confessedly false 
to begin with. We grope around in the dark, and we always 
take the wrong track in order to find the right one. A man 
finds his turkey while he is looking for his cow. With us, 
in our inquiries, everything is experimentation. So, travelers 
in going to Europe, always have fixed ideas of the country be- 
fore they start. After they arrive there and travel about, they 
gradually correct those ideas. But even when they return, their 
ideas are only partially correct. What writer who had been in 
Europe ever understood things as they are, or what two of them 
ever agreed on matters of detail ? If they wrote up a bull fight 
their accounts differed greatly, because they saw differently. 

The very nature of truth is that it cannot be eternal or uni- 
versal. Truth is always more or less local, special, provincial. 
There is not, nor can there ever be, any such thing as universal 
truth. There never was a more beautiful or more interesting 
book, for its time, than our Bible — but that time was two, three 



TRUTH AND THOUGHTS. 



85 



or four thousand years ago. Even truth has its day and it fin- 
ally disappears. Our Bible must be classed among natural pro- 
ductions, and like all such productions, it must eventually pass 
away and give place to something more recent and more in ac- 
cord with the times. Things that expire are not destroyed : 
nothing is destroyed. The Egyptian mummy is not a being 
destroyed, but it has become a back number. Men exist in the 
mummy form as they do in other forms. 

That a truth is not a truth to-day is no proof that it never 
was a truth. Nothing has ever been that might not properly be 
called truth. Writings that we call classics to-day were current 
truth at one time. Sophocles, Homer, Euripides are back num- 
bers now, but they were popular enough in their day. So it is 
with our Bible. The Bible was true — all bibles were true, but 
they do not remain so forever. They never were true for all 
peoples and all times. There never was such a truth or such a 
bible. 

We are living at all times in a land of dreams ; when we 
think we dream, and when we dream we think. We are con- 
stantly seeing things as we know they are not ; we are always 
forming figures and making images with which to beguile or 
amuse ourselves. Our constant employment is to deceive our- 
selves, or to get all the diversion possible out of the deceptions 
practiced upon us daily by others. We love fiction above all 
other things, because fiction has always constituted an impor- 
tant portion of our daily pabulum. Least of all things are we 
concerned about truth. We began as children, and we never 
cease to be children — certainly we never put away childish 
things. We never take life seriously. Then how do we get 
along ? Why, we simply drift ! — and we land at last where fate 
happens to leave us. 



Thought is always discordant in its nature, always rebellious. 
Thoughts lead to change, and without thought there would be 
no change, no progress. Two people who think independently 
never think alike, because they themselves are not alike. Slaves 
and all people who do not think will submit cheerfully and con- 
form to circumstances ; there is never any trouble in their case. 
But thinking and inquiring men are always at variance with 
each other. Consider the quarrels among Socialists and An- 
archists, and among new sects in every department of inquiry. 
Luther's Reformation led to no end of disputes and differences. 
There is no stopping point for philosophical inquiry. Those who 



S6 



TRUTH AND THOUGHTS. 



go a certain distance in their investigation are never satisfied 
until they go farther. 

A man who thinks necessarily knows more than a man who 
does not think. A man who does not think cannot rise above 
the brute. If he possesses any talent it cannot be anything be- 
yond that which is found among brutes. Men learn from study 
and contact with the world — they learn very little from teachers 
and books. It is this friction arising from contact that develops 
intellect and leads to knowledge. 

All our knowledge is merely a development of what we 
think, and our whole intelligence is made up of our own thoughts 
and impressions. We cannot go beyond our thoughts ; they are 
all that we know or ever can know. The most positive thing 
that we declare is simply what we think. We say this or that is 
so ; we mean that we believe it is so. That is as far as we can go 
in any case. We are at all times, night and day, busy with our 
thoughts, with images and impressions that come up in our mind. 
Our dreams are our thoughts, precisely the same in character as 
our ordinary thoughts. We compare and combine our impres- 
sions, and that is the way we progress and gain knowledge. To 
know ourself is to know the world, and it will be found eventu- 
ally, as we gain more light, that we are coextensive with the 
world. There is no line of demarkation that separates us from 
the world. The world is like the great ocean in which all in- 
dividuality is lost. We behold the restless mass of waters, and 
nothing more. 

It is very important that we should be continually impressed 
with the fact that we never get, under any conditions, anything 
but the thoughts of men. All laws, all creeds, all constitutions, 
are nothing but the thoughts and beliefs of certain men. When 
we move, it is because we think, and as the result of impressions. 
No beings move except as the result of thought and impression. 
Thoughts put the will in action. A log has no impressions, and 
hence it never moves except when it is moved. Men act wholly 
upon their impressions and opinions, and these are simply what 
they think. As intimated before, what we know or say is merely 
what we think. 

It takes the most experienced thinkers years to comprehend, 
appreciate and assimilate a new truth, and this is done by an in- 
ward process that is peculiarly their own. New thoughts have 
to be digested, like food that is taken in the stomach, before they 
can form a part of our intellectual system. This takes time and 
how foolish it is to expect to enlighten and convert the common 
reader in the short space of fifteen minutes ! It cannot be done, 
and it is ridiculous to make the attempt. It is only possible for 



TRUTH AXD THOUGHTS. 



-7 



the teacher to exercise a sort of quickening power upon the 
learner's mind, and leave the seed that may be found there to 
germinate and grow as it may. There is only one way to make 
converts in a hurry, and that is with the sword, an instrument 
with which the author is not acquainted and which he declines 
to use. 

As a rule, original thinkers speak to the people in an un- 
known tongue ; they speak to those whose hearing is imperfect 
and whose understanding is not clear. What satisfactory results 
should be expected under such conditions as these ? Men must 
have ears before they can hear, and they must have understand- 
ing before they can learn, even when the simplest truths are 
presented. 

It is not the writings and speeches of men, of geniuses and 
thinkers, that move mankind. People must themselves feel, 
they must starve, they must suffer, they must have an experi- 
ence of their own before they will rise in their might. This was 
certainly the case when the French Revolution began. Theories 
never give the masses much concern — certainly not those who 
do not and will not think. People must always feel before they 
can see. It is not the custom for masses to look ahead of them, 
and therefore they do not see what awaits them. It is impulse 
that moves bodies of men — reflection never. Individuals will 
sometimes reason, but bodies of men rarely. 

You cannot know anything unless you think ; you cannot 
do anything unless you think ; you cannot be anybody unless 
you think. Or expressed in another form, the more you think, 
the more you will know, the more you will learn and the more 
you can accomplish, and therefore the greater will be your value 
to the world. For instance, think about war, its wicked charac- 
ter and its consequences. Think how brutal is the treatment of 
the men by their superiors, and of the natives of any country by 
the officers as well as the men of conquering armies. No wonder 
that men desert in war whenever they find an opportunity. No 
wonder they rebel on land and mutiny on shipboard. Is there 
no goodness or virtue except in force? Or rather, is there any 
virtue or goodness in force, when applied to men under any 
circumstances ? 

It is worth the effort of any man to become impressed with 
the fact that, so far as we ourselves are concerned, things are 
simply as we happen to think and as they appear to our vision. 
For instance, just now we look upon crime, as we call certain 
kinds of conduct, as a horrible tiling, too dreadful even to think 
of ! This explains the cruel, often shameful, treatment that men 
receive who happen to be detected in crime, or. as we call it, 



£8 



TRUTH AND THOUGHTS. 



who are " caught in the act." But some day later on, such con- 
duct will assume a milder aspect, and it will be seen that crim- 
inals are not so wicked and so much worse than others as we 
have imagined them to be. The day is sure to come when we 
shall have no crimes — no conduct that we consider crime — and 
then of course we shall have no criminals. It all depends upon 
ourselves, and upon how we consider things, how we view them, 
how we look at them. A criminal, as we ought to see even now, 
is not an exceptional creature. He is one among a thousand, or 
among ten thousand. He is like the average. All men are crim- 
inals, all men do what they ought not to do. They do things 
against the law and against the wishes of the community, which 
are precisely the things that make men criminals in the estima- 
tion of their fellow men. 

Opinions differ in different countries as faces differ, and for 
the same reason. Climate and conditions give shape and color to 
opinions, as they form and paint faces. See how the foreigner 
changes after he has lived in this country for a time. And no- 
tice how very much his children who are born here differ in ap- 
pearance from those who are born abroad. It will also be found 
that they differ as much in their thoughts and ways of thinking 
as they do in their personal appearance and their way of acting. 
It is for this reason that men have one religion on the Ganges, 
another on the Nile, another on the Tiber, and another on the 
Thames, the sole reason for this difference lying in the difference 
of climate and conditions. What has a man himself to do with 
the shaping of his belief ? As much as he has to do with the 
shape of his head or face, and no more. 



CHAPTER III. 



GOODNESS AND MORALITY. 

The fact should never be overlooked for a moment that 
everything, and especially every quality, is wholly a relative 
matter. Nothing has any value or character except by compari- 
son with the opposite. Positive and negative, like the qualities 
good and bad, go by couples. What is good for one person is bad 
for another person. 

Things are good and beautiful only from our standpoint. 
Everything must be brought home to us. We judge not of 
things, but of ourselves, our feelings, our likes and dislikes. If 
a thing pleases us, it is beautiful or good. To use a maiden's 
expression, it is "lovely." But it is to be noticed that in all 
these and similar cases it is our feelings that are pleasant, not 
the things themselves. Things that do not please us are uni- 
formly bad — everything depends upon how we think or feel. 
What we call ugliness savages call beauty. The ugliness in such 
cases is our own ugliness, and the beauty is their own beauty. 
There is no ugliness or beauty outside of ourselves. 

There are no men that are either bad or good for everybody. 
There are men only that some people call bad, consider bad. 
Qualities of all kinds are only the results of opinion ; they are 
mere reflections thrown off from the observer himself. There 
are no things that everybody regards as good. What one eats 
and relishes another rejects with disgust. We call things good 
merely because they please us. So a tree is tall or not tall ac- 
cording to the standard we take for comparison. It all depends 
upon how we think or feel, and upon the standard we use for 
measurement. But why condemn men for their opinions, which 
they can neither modify nor remove? Men are condemned 
solely for their opinions, and this is done by other men who have 
their opinions. A man is a heretic for some people, while he is a 
very rational and worthy being for other people. 



90 



GOODNESS AND MORALITY. 



Men have no character of their own, only as we assign them 
a character. Whether they are good or bad, depends upon how 
we feel, how we think. But what opinion shall a man have who 
has no feeling in the matter and who does not think ? How shall 
a judge on the bench decide a case, being a man who is supposed 
to be without feeling or prejudice, a man who is not a man but 
a mere machine? As an impartial judge, what does he do? 
What does his decision accomplish, what light does it cast upon 
the case at last ? He simply judges, decides, gives his opinion. 
How ? Why, he takes one side or the other. He sides with one 
party and turns his back upon the other party ; he favors one 
side and oppresses, wrongs the other side. That happens in 
every court decision. So far as right is concerned, one party is 
always as near right as the other. It is only in the standpoint 
men start from and the direction that they take, in their rea- 
soning, that they actually differ. The judge in court does not 
solve the problem or change the matter at issue in any particular. 
He merely cuts the Gordian knot arbitrarily, as Alexander did. 
He does not attempt to solve the problem. The parties at the 
conclusion stand just where they stood before the trial. The 
party defeated submits because he is overpowered, but his 
opinion remains as it was before. The other party goes off 
triumphant with nothing more than he had at the outset, except 
the decision of the court in his favor. Where does justice come 
in under such circumstances? It is never fair for any man, 
judge or no" judge as he may be. to presume to put his feelings 
and opinions in the place of another man's feelings or opinion. 
Any man is quite as capable of judging his own case as some 
stranger is for him, especially as the stranger usually has no 
other knowledge of the case than what he gets from hearsay. 
The stranger who does so must act upon the assumption that he 
is a wiser and holier man than the party interested. But unfor- 
tunately we have never yet met a man who answered to any 
such description as that. 

God is the only just judge, but he never presides at Mais. 
His presence in court is a self-evident fiction. All the judgments 
rendered are those of common men, and God's presence is 'only 
a matter of proxy. There are no other judgments. All trials 
are shams and mere pretence — simply hocus pocus to justify 
men's wickedness and protect them against the legitimate conse- 
quences of their iniquity. If a man wishes to wrong us, and has 
the will and the power to do it, let him go at it boldly, and make 
no excuse or apologies whatever. Wrong-doing admits of no 
excuse or justification. If it is justified, it is not wrong-doing ! 
How one-sided and inexact are all our ideas of things. 



GOODNESS AND MORALITY. 



91 



What we call good others call bad. A conflagration is a bad 
thing for one who suffers loss, but it is a good thing for those 
who derive profit therefrom. Doctors profit by the misfortunes 
of other people. Much sickness is not a bad thing for members 
of that profession, if they and their families escape. One man 
gains a lawsuit, but somebody else must lose it. If one general 
triumphs, another general must be defeated, and so it goes all 
through life. Nothing that we say is strictly true. We are 
never perfectly well nor perfectly ill — in no case are we so well 
that we might not be better, nor so ill that we might not be 
worse. Ill or well is simply a question of more or less. Less ill 
means better ; more ill means worse. 



People as a rule have an erroneous conception of the true 
nature of morality,, and they are especially mistaken in regard to 
the source from which it is derived. It is the general belief that 
morality is intimately connected with religion, and that at all 
times one implies the existence of the other, that people who are 
pious are necessarily moral, and that those who are moral must 
also have deep religious convictions. But such a notion as this 
is clearly founded in error. Quite aside from any special inquiry 
into the case and without any appeal to logic, it may be stated as 
a well known fact that in all communities there are plenty of 
moral men who are neither professors of religion nor believers in 
Christian doctrines ; and so there are plent}^ of earnest and de- 
voted Christian people who really believe in God and Christ, and 
yet they could not be called moral according to the standard that 
is usually recognized in civilized lands. Indeed, there is a radi- 
cal difference in the nature of morals and religion. They are 
derived from entirely different sources. Morals are merely cus- 
toms that prevail in certain communities. They are simply evi- 
dences of what is considered proper and what as improper by 
men. 

People make the same mistake in regard to education that 
they make in regard to religion, namely, that it makes men 
better. It is well known that education does not make men 
better. Education is merely a certain amount of knowledge 
acquired, and perhaps a certain amount of discipline applied, 
but what effect this knowledge or discipline has upon the con- 
duct of men depends upon the kind of knowledge and the charac- 
ter of the discipline. It might be added that very many believe 
not only that education and religion make men better and 
happier, but that our laws also have the same effect. Here 



92 



GOODNESS AND MORALITY. 



again we find that the prevailing impression of the unreflecting 
masses of mankind is based on error. There are bad laws as well 
as good laws, and their effect upon the destiny of men depends 
entirely upon what happens to be the direction that they take. 

Again, it must be remembered that most Christians merely 
profess religion, and the world never knows, perhaps the Chris- 
tians themselves never know, how much of their Christianity 
is genuine and how much is spurious. The fact that a man 
merely professes religion or is enrolled as a member of some 
Christian church can have but a slight effect upon his character 
and his career as a man. Society has long since learned that it 
is never safe to depend upon a man's mere professions either in 
matters of religion or in any other direction. Our experience 
teaches us that there are good men in the church as there are 
bad men in the church, just as we shall find to be the case if we 
go among those who make no professions and belong to no 
church. 

Most certainly morality does not come from the Bible ; it 
comes from the people. As a matter of fact morality has but little 
connection with religion in any case. There is plenty of religion 
without morality and plenty of morality without religion. In 
other words, a person may be at the same time very religious 
and very immoral. The Bible has not changed in two thousand, 
perhaps not in four thousand years, but the standards of morality 
are changing every day. Besides, it will be remembered, we 
have all sorts of morality and standards of morality, according 
to times and peoples. German morality is one thing, French 
morality is another, and English morality is different from either. 
Our own morality to-day is different from what it was a hundred 
years ago. 

No, it cannot be borne in mind too well, that in religion, as 
well as in the case of education and laws, the chief object in 
view is not to improve the character of men nor to make them 
happier. In religion the object is simply to save people's souls, 
which is to be done solely by obeying God and observing certain 
prescribed ceremonies and sacrifices with strictness and regu- 
larity. The object in education is to enlighten people, to en- 
able them to shine in society, and perhaps to acquire certain 
powers and capabilities that they could not secure in any other 
manner. Education is strictly a business matter, with business 
ends solely in view. The object of ordinary laws is to enable 
those who are on the inside, the favored few, to so discipline 
and direct those on the outside that they will obey their masters 
at all times and pay the tribute demanded with cheerfulness and 
despatch. 



GOODNESS AND MORALITY. 



93 



Morals are laws made by men for men. They are simply 
usages which have grown into law from the tacit consent of the 
community continued along for an indefinite time. Religious 
laws have a different origin and a different purpose. They are 
supposed to come from God. through inspiration and revelation. 
There is nothing in common between religious law and moral 
law. except that in some cases one may contain provisions that 
the other also contains. So statute law is different from either. 
It treats of man in his relations to the state. These laws also 
contain many provisions that are found in both moral and re- 
ligious law, and yet it is known to be entirely independent of 
either. A man is a good citizen if he obeys the officers of the 
government and follows the laws of the state, while he himself 
may be neither pious nor moral. It is well known that there are 
plenty of men who are considered good citizens, and are even 
known as moral men. and yet they neither profess nor believe in 
religion. Even the clergy have members who occasionally fall 
from grace, the same as other professions. And during the 
Dark Ages when men were more intensely religious than they 
ever were before or ever have been since, many practices were 
common in the church which are considered criminal, or at 
least immoral in our day. The rule then was that any fraud or 
trick was excusable, if it only promoted the success of the 
church. Lies were common enough, and forgeries were by no 
means rare even among professedly pious people. This is simply 
history without any attempt at making comments. There are 
plenty of good commands in the Bible, as well as bad ones : but 
good commands or good precepts do not make men good any 
more than good laws makes a people good. David and Solomon, 
and even Joshua, were pious enough, but nobody at the present 
day considers them models of either goodness or morality. 

Morality is a matter of practice, not theory. The question is 
not what the Bible teaches, but what do those do who profess 
to believe in the Bible ? Christ's teachings in the main are ex- 
cellent. But how many Christians follow them to-day ? It is a 
well known fact that many confirmed criminals are sincere be- 
lievers in redemption through the blood of Christ. Indeed, who 
need redemption more than criminals and wicked people gener- 
ally ? They are the lost sheep that Christ came to save. 

Finally , it must be remembered that what is called good or 
bad. moral or immoral, is wholly a matter of opinion among 
men. which varies with different peoples under different circum- 
stances and at different times. Clearly enough, as we have 
already intimated, morals are something that God or religion 
has nothing to do with. If God established morals, they would 



94 



GOODNESS AND MORALITY. 



have some fixed or determinate character. As it is, they vary 
with climates, localities and races. Vice and virtue at best are 
closely allied. To have less vice means that we are inclined to 
virtue ; and to have less virtue that we are inclined to vice. It 
is a matter of degree, and the two easily gradate into each other. 
There is no distinguishing line between them. A vice in one 
case becomes a virtue in another. In war killing is meritorious, 
and the more a man kills, the higher he usually ranks. In ordi- 
nary society killing people, defenceless or otherwise, is against 
the law, and it is declared to be a crime. Among peoples not far 
advanced in civilization, robbery is a popular pursuit — indeed, it 
is through robbery that primitive peoples live, as well as a great 
many people who are not primitive. 

Good morals belong to no one people nor to any single age. 
They are entirely temporary, variable, and under all circumstances 
extremely uncertain. Morals are never meant for the whole peo- 
ple, a feature which is characteristic of all laws, whether hu- 
man or divine. No law was ever enacted which it was expected 
all men should observe. There are exceptions to all rules, and 
there certainly are plenty of exceptions to all laws. A favored 
few always manage to escape the burdens of society ; and when 
it comes to a question of morals, they usually do as they please. 



CHAPTER IV. 

MODESTY AND REVERENCE. 

Be modest, that is, be humble, be retiring, be unpretending. 
But why so ? Why should any one be humble, or retiring or 
unpretending in the presence of other people, often of most ordi- 
nary people ? Simply to be polite, to be in good form, to do as 
other nice and well bred people are supposed to do. But that is 
no reason at all, no rule by which any one must necessarily 
govern his action. People are as apt to do wrong as right ; or at 
least their ideas of right may not accord with our ideas of right, 
and there is absolutely no necessity that we should pursue their 
line of conduct or endorse all that they decide to have done. 
We are supposed to be free men, and being such, we have noth- 
ing to consult but our own opinion and our own tastes, when we 
wish to determine what we had better do. To be polite, to be in 
good form in all you do, to consult the wishes of other people 
and disregard your own, is to be a slave, or at least to take the 
position of a slave and conduct yourself as a slave ordinarily 
conducts himself. A slave always humbles himself before his 
superiors ; he takes off his hat at all times, and on rare occasions 
he prostrates himself in the dust. The slave is the politest of 
persons. He never goes before others, he goes behind others ; 
he speaks in subdued tones, and never says a word of his own 
merits. Indeed, being a slave, he has no merits. He never eats 
till others are filled, and then he is satisfied with the leavings. 
He stands up while others sit down. He does everything for 
other people, and never does anything for himself. Poor crea- 
ture ! Who shall take care of him and provide for him finally ? 
The Lord — the Lord attends to that business. Sometimes he 
does, but often these children die of hunger and neglect. 

But why should a man be eternally modest ? Why should 



96 



MODESTY AND REVERENCE. 



he be perpetually praising other people, and never saying a word 
of his own claims? There is no reason — certainly no good rea- 
son can be given. If a man humbles himself, everybody will 
tread upon him or step over him. He accepts a low rank for 
himself, and naturally enough everybody is willing to take him 
at his own rating, especially since it makes more room for his 
competitors in the upper departments of life. Every man is 
taken largely at his own estimate, at least in the first instance. 
People have not the time to investigate the claims of every 
stranger that comes before them for recognition. 

No, there is not the slightest excuse for a man to belittle and 
disparage himself. Modesty is not a virtue, it is only a custom, 
a practice. It is a weakness. It is often a folly, and it is al- 
ways an injustice to one's self. If a man has done a good thing 
and he knows it is a good thing, why should he say it is not good, 
or even treat the matter with indifference ? There is no reason, 
except that custom requires it. A wiss man makes his own 
customs as he goes along. If a custom is wrong, let him set 
about changing it. If other people presume to make laws for us, 
may we not also make laws for them in return ? Modesty means 
deference, homage, servility — practices that are deprecated and 
disused by every sensible^ man. Modesty is born from fear, or at 
least from timidity. All its characteristics are slavish. A self- 
reliant man is never modest in the ordinary acceptation of the 
term. There was no modesty about Napoleon, or Csesar, or Crom- 
well. A man who is content to be in the rear rank will always 
be allowed to remain there. 

Why should a man never speak of himself ? Whom does he 
know better than himself? In whom does he take a greater 
interest than in himself ? Why may not a man, at proper times, 
in proper places, and in a proper manner, speak of himself — his 
doubts, his difficulties, his dangers, his defeats, his victories, or 
even his achievements? We see absolutely no reason why a 
sensible man may not. When one tells of himself, he tells what 
he knows ; when he speaks of others, he tells only what he im- 
agines or believes that he knows. How shall we ever get any 
real knowledge of others and their experience, if they are not 
allowed to speak of themselves? No, it is not necessarily a 
weakness, nor even an impertinence, for a man to speak of him- 
self. There is neither merit about it nor demerit. We allow a 
man to put his own price upon his own property. Why should 
he not also be permitted to place his own estimate on his achieve- 
ments, without being exposed to the charge of vanity or pre- 
presumption ? 

But why should a man play the part of a stupid ox, especially 

6 



p 



MODESTY AND REVERENCE. 97 

if he knows he is capable of playing a part much higher up on 
the programme? We never could see why a sensible man 
should do anything of that kind, unless he is content to take the 
position of a slave or a sycophant. The theory is that a man 
must humble and disparage himself in order to elevate his 
master. This idea of servility, like all our ideas of politeness, 
originates in palaces and courts. Precedence in all things must 
be given to the master, simply because he happens to be the 
master. This is how it comes that all gentle-folk, so called, are 
flunkeys, in spirit and manner, if not in form and in fact. 

If you are expected to be honest with other people, why 
should you not be honest with yourself ? If you make a blunder, 
or do what is wrong, why not say so ? And if you have done a 
wise or worthy action, and you know it, as most people do in 
such cases, why should you endeavor to conceal it and act as if 
you were ashamed of what you had done ? Civility is akin to 
servility. You must never speak of yourself first ! Why not ? 
Are you not as good as any one else ? You certainly, ought to be 
at least. If everybody made a fool of himself in this way, we 
should have none but fools. Finally, did you ever stop to think 
that, to be real polite and in "good form," you must play that 
you are the slave and all the other fellows are masters ? They do 
so in China, and all over the world. 

This tabooing of one's self and never mentioning one's own 
name, which is so prevalent all over the civilized world, is a 
mere conventionalism which was never founded on sound sense. 
The Germans carry the idea still farther. Among them, to be 
proper, you must not say "thou" but " they," when you address 
a person. It was on the same principle of reverence that the 
Jews never pronounced the word "Jehovah." They called the 
Deity by another name. Among the natives of Australia a man 
is not permitted to mention the name of his mother-in-law or 
father-in-law. In Sumatra, the native abstains from pronounc- 
ing his own name, for precisely the same reason that we do, be- 
cause he wants to appear polite. Indeed, savages have plenty of 
politeness. If we were not all born in a state of slavery, and we 
had not remained in that state up to the present time, things 
would not appear to us as they do. Our habits and education 
have everything to do with our impressions. 

Modesty easily gradates into bashfulness and shame. But 
what should a man be ashamed of ? Of his form and personal 
appearance as nature made it ? Why should a man be ashamed 
of his person, unless he is deformed ? And even then he might 
feel pained, but not actually ashamed. Should a man be 
ashamed of his conduct ? Not if he is rational. No man should 



98 



MODESTY AND REVERENCE. 



be ashamed of what he does, even though some people may call 
it wrong. A man should not only have the courage of his con- 
victions but also of his action. A brave man is never either 
afraid or ashamed. He always does what he feels like doing 
and what he believes he ought to do. The real hero in this 
world is the man who always does what he feels to be right ; with 
the people generally, the verdict, we know, is different. They 
vote a man a hero who does uniformly what he knows to be 
wrong, such as killing people in war or acquiring a vast amount 
of property through the labors of other people. 



We sometimes think people would get along better in this 
world if they should dispense with reverence entirely. Why 
should we reverence any man living or dead ? A slave might do 
so, but a free man never. We are accustomed to revere men 
because we believe them holy and we imagine that they have 
natures that are different from ours. But no such men are in 
existence — there can be none. All men are alike in material and 
make-up, and though individuals may differ in minor respects, 
the difference is in no case radical. There are no truly sacred 
or divme beings in all this world — certainly there are no men 
who are better than other men in any essential respect. It is the 
clothes, the tinsel, the gems in the diadem — these are the things 
with which we are really impressed. But why should we be 
deluded for a moment by such tawdry articles as these ? No man 
living is entitled to our reverence or submission, because no man 
is better than ourselves. 

Why should we dread people ? Why should we honor them 
or bow down to them ? Why should we go a step out of our way 
to see Napoleon Bonaparte, if he were living, or Capt. Kidd, or 
Louis XIV. , or Oliver Cromwell, or even Grover Cleveland if he 
happened to pass through our town ? What folly, what idiocy, 
what toadyism ! Would these men come a step out of their way 
to see us ? Would they even bow if they passed us in the street ? 
Certainly not. And yet we would run after them like children, 
because we have such an infatuation for kings and conquerors, 
and for noted men generally ! 

The two main sources of misery among mankind will be 
found to lie in these two weaknesses : Ignorance and cowardice. 
And we may add that these are things of which men should be 
most ashamed, rather than of what is called their crimes and 
misdoings. 



/ 



CHAPTER V. 

GIFTS AND GRATITUDE. 

Giving is akin, in its character and effects, to loving, favor- 
ing, and protecting. Giving is always partial, always exclusive. 
If we wish to be fair and just, we should not select our favorites 
and give to them only. We should give to all and in equal pro- 
portions. But giving, like protecting, and like benevolent work 
of all kinds, never takes any such direction. 

Giving implies two classes of people — those who give and 
those who receive. But where shall we draw the line between 
those who should be the givers and those who should be the 
receivers ? Why should not the givers be the receivers and vice 
versa? If giving is not the dictate merely of a whim, it should 
be based upon the merits of the recipient — but it rarely is so. 
Certainly in most cases those who give have more merit than 
those who receive. 

Again, giving should be condemned as an unprofitable, if not 
an improper practice. If the giving is merely a scheme by 
which to bribe the recipient and influence him in some way, of 
course it should be condemned as an unworthy action. If the 
gift is made without any motive, and without expecting to de- 
rive some benefit therefrom either direct or remote, then it is 
simply aimless and foolish. It is a mere waste of property. 
Besides, giving seldom works well in practice. It tends to give 
the recipient a higher opinion of himself. If the amount given 
is large, it leads to indolence, since if people find that there are 
those who are willing to provide for them, they will see no 
necessity of providing for themselves. Charity usually works in 
precisely that way. Where it is possible, people should be edu- 
cated to take care of themselves and they should have no other 
dependence than upon their own exertions. The only way peo- 
ple can ever be independent is by their ceasing to be dependent. 
Giving is rarely a work of good policy. Those who receive 



Lof C. 



100 



GIFTS AND GRATITUDE. 



come to depend upon the giver ; and if they receive a little to- 
day, they expect more to-morrow. That is the tendency in all 
cases, so that generally the disappointment in not receiving must 
nearly counterbalance the gratification for what has been re- 
ceived. 

No, giving is to be condemned as a practice for a hundred 
reasons, but for none more than because of its manifest injustice. 
When we do give to this or that man, why not give to a thou- 
sand or ten thousand others just as deserving? We give be- 
cause of our abundance. Why should not everybody give to us 
who has been more fortunate in accumulating property than we 
have ? Giving will not stand the test of reason, view it from any 
standpoint that we like. If the giving is a question of merit, 
give to all who have merit, and let everybody give. Also, let 
everybody receive. If it is because people have abundance, let 
everybody give who has abundance, and to everybody who has 
not an abundance. This just rule would keep people busy ex- 
changing gifts all the time. Really, giving is not a reasonable 
act but merely the result of custom and of some strange im- 
pulse. People want to appear good : at least they want to be 
called good. They want to do their duty. 

The humblest recipient can easily be spoiled by regular or 
even by irregular giving. He soon comes to demand it as his 
right, and he can easily conjure up some sufficient reason in his 
mind why he is entitled to all he receives — and more. Try the 
practice of giving, and see if that is not the uniform result. 
The tendency is, as we have already intimated, to spoil people 
in a dozen different directions. The best kind of help all around, 
is self-help, or that kind of assistance that enables or induces 
people to help themselves. 

Then there is another striking feature which deserves to be 
noticed in connection with this topic. It is the fact, which 
every one must have discovered, that people are amazingly 
anxious to get something for nothing and to have something 
given to them. In other words, in order to have fifty cents 
given to them out and out for something that they have no use 
for, many people would be willing to invest even ten dollars of 
their own hard-earned funds. That is simply human nature — a 
thirst that cannot be allayed to get something for nothing, no 
matter what it costs. 



People who do favors for others, and especially for bodies of 
men, hoping to enjoy gratitude as their compensation, or to re- 



GIFTS AND GRATITUDE. 



101 



ceive some more substantial remuneration, will often find them- 
selves most grievously disappointed. Gratitude, in this self -seek- 
ing world of ours, is a most unsubstantial return for services 
rendered. The best way for every man is to do what he wishes, 
or what he feels that he ought to do, without any thought of 
gratitude or any expectation of remuneration. It is poor policy 
to make a practice of receiving favors, and it is never a profit- 
able business to grant favors. 

It is about time that we gave up talking about gratitude. 
Gratitude is only a form of compensation which we exact from 
others, an obligation which we seek to impose upon them, often 
without their consent, and even against their wishes. If people 
insist upon compensation, or returns in some way, for what they 
do for others, they might better leave such work unperformed. 
Shall we do no kindness, shall we render no favors to any one, 
without obligating him and expecting something in return ? As 
we have before intimated, there is no merit in doing anything 
that is done for a price, or for returns of any kind. As a matter 
of fact a true kindness is something that cannot and should not 
be requited. Compensation should never be mentioned in that 
connection. The moment a kindness is paid for the transaction 
is closed and the kindness disappears. There is no kindness in 
hired service of any kind — it is purely a business transaction, 
and when the wages are paid the debt is canceled. If we do 
things gratuitously, as we claim, how shall we demand even 
gratitude or any sense of obligation in return ? The doctrine of 
reciprocity is a poor basis to act upon in the affairs of this world. 
One side or the other is sure to get the worst of the bargain. 

No action is, properly considered, meritorious, and no man is 
entitled to praise above his fellow men. Neither does any man 
deserve censure. Censure lies wholly in our opinion, which may 
be right and may be wrong. No man has any right to set him- 
self up as the judge of other men's action, either to praise or con- 
demn them. No man is properly the cause of any result, nor 
can he be the true hero of any achievement. No man accom- 
plishes anything of moment alone. All our statesmen and mili- 
tary and naval heroes are rendered renowned and are accorded 
praise that properly belongs, if to any one, to the subordinates 
who are in the service of these men. No matter how great any 
man may be, he can do at best only about as much as other men 
could do under the same circumstances, and not any more. 

The surest way, and in fact the only way, to avoid disap- 
pointment is to expect nothing. People who do favors for 
others, and especially those who tax their energies for the sole 
benefit of the public, ask and expect too much in return. If 



102 



GIFTS AND GRATITUDE. 



they did what they ought to do and desired to do, where does 
the obligation come in ? They have no right to demand honors 
and applause in return for what they have done of their own 
volition. It is a great weakness in any man to ask or demand 
such things as compensation for what he assumes that he did. 
This was the failing of Horace Greeley, a most excellent, able and 
worthy man. He thought the people of the United States ought 
to elect him president, because he had edited a good newspaper, 
opposed slavery all his life and favored temperance. But the 
people decided, as they had a perfect right to do, that they 
wanted a different man for that place, and the result was that 
Horace Greeley absolutely died of a broken heart, from the 
effects of disappointment and despair arising from his defeat. 
A really strong man will rise above the taunts and slights, and 
even the unfairness, of the public. As we have intimated before, 
he will expect nothing better, and hence he will not be disap- 
pointed. 

Gratitude is something that is supposed to come from a being 
that is lower and it is considered an offering that is due to some 
one who is superior. Kings and masters never feel grateful to 
their subjects for services rendered, for the very best that the 
slave can do is what he ought to do. Men get no thanks for 
what they ought or are obliged to do. A man pays his debts — 
he cancels his obligations — and he expects no thanks for that. 

Aboriginal people know little or nothing of gratitude, nor of 
many other things that we consider virtues. Even the en- 
lightened Greeks had a similar failing. Our laws, our codes, our 
morals, our virtues even, are peculiar to ourselves. We should 
not think for a moment that everybody has the same notions as 
we have on these subjects. Many people do not bother with 
either vices or virtues. They know nothing about them, and 
they do not care. 

As we are not supposed to be slaves or subjects, there is noth- 
ing really that we ought to feel grateful for — we have no obliga- 
tions. All business ought to be done on a cash basis — no debts, 
no standing obligations, no duty, no gratitude, no homage. Owe 
no man anything — not even thanks or favors, certainly not ob- 
ligations. Some people think they must be loyal to the king, to 
their friends, to everybody. Why should not the king also be 
loyal to his subjects? No, we, the subjects, must yield to the 
king, must sacrifice, must do as we are ordered to do, never 
murmuring and never expecting any return or compensation. 

If the principle of gratitude is to hold good, where would 
the obligation end? When a man returns a favor, he simply 
does a new favor, and the original party ought himself to feel 



DEBTS AND OBLIGATIONS. 



103 



obligated ; and thus new favors and new obligations would arise 
indefinitely. This often happens in the case of Christmas gifts, 
and there is really no end to them until some one fails to do his 
or her duty in giving. In the same way revenge acts. Where 
could it be expected to end, if it is a good and proper thing? 



CHAPTER VI 

DEBTS AND OBLIGATIONS. 

Anybody who urges people to run into debt and cover their 
property with mortgages gives them very bad advice, even in 
this age when credits are the rule and cash payments are the ex- 
ception. People do not need to be urged and encouraged to run 
into debt by those who recommend it as highly desirable. It 
comes easy enough to run into debt without urging. It is pre- 
cisely like falling off a log. The times favor it, the money- 
lenders favor it, the merchants favor it. Money is made by run- 
ning into debt, but only by an exceptional few — to the multitude, 
running into debt is a losing game, figure it as you will. A little 
of running into debt by young people in good health who have 
something substantial to show for their investment in the end 
may be a good thing. It incites to labor and saving, in the case 
of careful and judicious people. But after all, running into debt 
is something never to be recommended by any one for any one. 
There are too many chances, too many circumstances beyond the 
control of the borrower. He is entirely at the mercy of the 
money-lender — the latter owns the debtor body and soul. There 
are many good men who lend money — indeed, money-lending is 
very common — but a majority of such lenders resemble Shylock 
in many particulars. 

Borrowing, we know, is one way to get rich, but it is always 
a risky process. It often fails. Besides, we would not recom- 
mend striving to get rich to any one. It is not worth any man's 
while. To be independent is another matter. That is a worthy 
ambition for any person. 



Why will people persist in burdening themselves with debts, 
contracts and obligations of any kind ? Every contract, every 



104 



DEBTS AND OBLIGATIONS. 



obligation, is a mortgage upon the person — especially if the 
party be a man of honor — and such encumbrances are seldom 
removed with ease. What makes the proceeding all the more 
senseless, is that in nine cases out of ten the obligation assumed 
is entirely unnecessary. 

If you propose to do anything, why not wait till you get 
ready? Perhaps you may die, or possibly you«may change your 
mind before the appointed day arrives. The best rule of life that 
any man can make and follow is this : Never make promises — 
certainly never make them if it is possible to avoid doing so. 
No man can call himself a free man if he is burdened with ob- 
ligations of any character. It is far more manly not to make 
promises than it is to break them after they are made. If you 
make no promises, you can do as you please; if you make 
promises, then some one else is your master and you must do as 
he pleases. Viewed in any light, to make promises is a foolish 
venture which sometimes turns out well, but often does not. In 
most cases, we make promises or engagements because some one 
asks us or importunes us to do so. But a man will be sure to 
meet with a very unhappy fate in the end if he makes a practice 
of doing everything and anything that everybody asks him to do. 

It should be remembered that no man has the power to place 
us under obligations. That is a personal matter and it requires a 
personal effort. No man can be obligated in any manner unless 
he obligates himself, and every man who at any time takes such 
a risk does himself a great injustice. 

People love to talk about obligations — our obligations — obli- 
gations that we are under to do this or that, or ten thousand 
other things ! But really we are under obligations to no man at 
any time. We do as we please, and you may do as you please, 
or as you consider it best to do. You can be the judge of what 
you do, and we will also be the judges of what we do. We are 
under no obligation to make this world good and happy — we could 
not if we tried. Still people will insist that we must meddle with 
the world, correct its faults and save it from its sins. We deny 
that we are under any such obligations. It requires all the time 
of an ordinary man to take care of himself. 



CHAPTER VII. 



CHARACTER AND QUALITIES. 

Character is that something which makes people and things 
what they are. And what makes character? Simply the ma- 
terial of which individuals are composed and the external in- 
fluences by which they are affected. But as the material of 
which bodies are composed continually changes, and as the ex- 
ternal influences by which they are affected also change, it 
follows as a natural consequence that no body, no creature, noth- 
ing, can have what might be called a permanent or established 
character. Character and qualities are not possessions that be- 
long to bodies, and tljey do not constitute something that is 
inseparable from them. As we have already intimated, the 
characteristics and qualities of things are given to them by the 
influences which develop them and which make them what they 
are, and since these influences and conditions change, the bodies 
or objects must themselves change. 

If we bear these facts or conclusions well in mind, we must 
be able to perceive that nothing continues to exist for any ap- 
preciable length of time. To exist, a creature or a thing must 
have a character of its own, and that character must be un- 
changeable. The moment an object changes its character in the 
slightest respect, it must cease to exist, since the existence of an 
object depends entirely upon its maintaining its character un- 
changed, and likewise retaining all the qualities and attributes 
that have been peculiar to it from the beginning. To add to an 
object, to take from it, or to modify it in any manner, is to 
destroy it, since it has ceased to be what it was before and has 
become something entirely different. The reason why we do 
not notice or appreciate this well established fact, is that the 
changes are so gradual, they are so quietly made, so impercep- 
tible and so constant, that they do not attract our attention. 



106 



CHARACTER AND QUALITIES. 



It is only when we compare the beginning and the end of a 
long series of steps or changes, as youth and old age, or the 
hamlet with the full grown city into which it has finally ex- 
panded, that we perceive that the identity has been destroyed 
and one thing has come forward to replace another thing which 
has departed. 

We are in the habit of speaking of things and calling them 
identical, when we know they are not so. The river, we know, 
is simply the water by which it is constituted ; but the water 
that flows by us to-day cannot be the same water that we saw 
yesterday, and hence it cannot really be the same river. Its 
identity is being changed every moment ; and so it is with every 
object in nature. It appears and disappears and it is replaced 
constantly; it is born and expires every instant. Such is the 
unalterable law of nature. How can we say that a man, any 
man, lives ninety or one hundred years? The man that dies is 
not the child that was born — there is nothing in common be- 
tween the two. When we come to obtain a closer insight into 
the nature of death than we have at present, we shall have a 
different conception of its character from what we have had all 
along. Death is constant ; it is ever present with us. And still 
we are afraid to die ! As if we had not been dying and been 
replaced by a different being every day and every moment of 
our lives ! We are a mere drop in the ocean. We bubble up, 
appear on the surface for an instant, arid then we sink and are 
lost in the ocean again, being at all times nothing more nor less 
than what we were in the beginning. At best, we were never 
more than a mere form, a shadow, a phenomenon, at any period 
of our existence. 

Everything external and internal has an effect on character 
— the climate, the country, the scenery, the people. Everything 
that a man eats and drinks, especially the latter, leaves its im- 
pression. We all know how a single dose of whiskey of suitable 
size will change the disposition of men, making one morose and 
another hilarious. We know that the food which we feed a tree 
or an animal, and its quantity, affect the size and character very 
materially. The animal that lives is not changed, it is true ; that 
simply disappears and is replaced daily by another and entirely 
different animal. 

Eemember that all the qualities that objects are supposed to 
have are assigned to them by men. They appear green to some 
and blue to others, violet in one case and lilac in another, hand- 
some to one and ugly to others, tall to one party and short to 
another party. All is relative, and everything depends upon the 
one who makes the comparison and how he does it. All color 



CHARACTER AND QUALITIES. 



107 



comes from reflection, and so does character. Water under one 
temperature is a liquid, under another it is a solid, and under 
another it is a vapor. So the metals may have the solid or the 
liquid form ; and some gases under pressure may assume the 
solid form. External conditions may change the nature entirely. 
Many gases may be transformed into liquids. Which is the 
natural state of these bodies? Doubtless one is as much so as 
another. Steam and ice are as much forms of water as the 
liquid is itself. They are all forms of some imaginary thing 
which is neither ice, water nor vapor. 

A man never changes his opinion ; but new men follow old 
men, and the new men may have new opinions. Outside in- 
fluences determine a man's character, and character determines 
conduct. But reason, which is the result of outside influences, 
also affects conduct. 

No man completes his career till he dies. He changes little 
by little every day. He acts somewhat upon the world, and the 
world reacting exerts some influence upon him. Napoleon at 
twenty-one was not, practically, the same man as Napoleon at 
fifty. He was an entirely different person at each of these periods, 
though of course there were many points of resemblance be- 
tween the two. Suppose we saw the pictures of the two Na- 
poleons, would we recognize them as being one and the same 
person? They are not the same person, or we would not speak 
of them as two separate individuals. There can be no two 
sames ; if there were two sames, they would be identical, and 
hence only one. Resemblance is quite different from sameness or 
identity. There may be a resemblance between two individuals, 
but there cannot be a sameness in any case. The moment there 
is a change, then identity ceases. The slightest change in ten 
makes it something different from ten ; add to or take from an 
ounce, and it ceases to be an ounce. The moment a man changes 
in the slightest, he becomes a new individual. 

Does the number or quantity make any difference in charac- 
ter or quality ? If a community is made up of fools, are they 
not all equally fools, and does the number elevate the group to 
any appreciable extent ? Or in other words, do ten fools know 
any more than one fool does ? If anything they really know 
less, for men in bodies paralyze each other and they know less 
than the men do as individuals. This is a well attested fact in 
all legislative, judicial and deliberative bodies. What makes a 
nation eminent is not its numbers, but a few talented and remark- 
able individuals. Numbers never help in such matters. If a man 
has a million pennies fresh from the mint, what has he more 
than if he had only one penny? They are all duplicates and 



108 



CHARACTER AND QUALITIES. 



after a man has seen one, he has seen all. After the first speci- 
men, the rest are mere counters. And yet, to speak accurately, 
they are not duplicates. Each must have some little point or 
characteristic of its own. They certainly were not made at the 
same moment, and the space occupied by any one is different 
from that of all the rest. Nature, we know, has no duplicates. 
It affords resemblances, but no case where two things are iden- 
tical. What man does in all cases is machine work ; but nature 
makes nothing, not even a hair, without being original. It has 
no type, or at least it follows none. Out of ten million faces, no 
two are alike, and no two could replace each other. Man is fond 
of order, of repetition, of geometrical figures oft reproduced. 
That is because he is only a copyist. He never gets an idea that 
does not come from nature. Indeed, he himself came from 
nature. 

Nature could not produce two things exactly alike, because 
they are always differently located and they are each affected by 
conditions and influences which are peculiar to their case. 

Again, we say, numbers do not count. They may be service- 
able in calculations, as letters are in algebra and figures are in 
geometry, but they amount to nothing beyond that. There is 
nothing in nature to correspond to numbers, or to operations in 
numbers. There is no adding, subtracting, dividing, multiply- 
ing in nature. There are no fractions in nature— all are wholes. 
There is no such thing as two apples, two cows, two horses — 
that is, no repetition, no case of the same thing twice. We have 
one apple and one apple, but that does not make two of any one 
thing, of either one apple. Things cannot properly be counted, 
because they cannot be classified. To classify things and bring 
them into the same category, they must be exactly alike. Where 
are the two things that are exactly alike ? Is it our two eyes, or 
two feet, or two fingers ? 

The opinion of one wise man is worth more than that of a 
million of idiots, because a million of idiots know no more than 
one idiot knows. So sixteen ounces weigh no more than one 
ounce ; but a pound weighs more, because it is sixteen times as 
heavy. You cannot weigh one ounce against two ounces, or 
against sixteen ounces. An ounce will balance an ounce, and 
there it stops. If you add other ounces to the scale on the other 
side, it will not act upon them, because its weight was neu- 
tralized by the first opposing or counteracting ounce. Action 
must equal the reaction in all cases. It is no more trouble to 
take a hundred steps than one step, since you take one at a time 
always. Everything is only one, and it cannot be changed into 
something more than one. 



CHARACTER AND QUALITIES. 



109 



If it is the quality that does the business, what good will 
numbers do ? If quinine cures people, a speck will answer : if 
more is required, it is the quantity and not the quinine that cures. 
Two heads are never better than one, if they are both sheeps- 
heads. How could they be? If an acre of a certain piece of 
land is poor, how could ten acres of the same kind of land be 
any better? When land is worthless, the more a man has the 
poorer he is. One hundred men cannot do more than one man, 
provided they are all of the same strength or calibre. What one 
man does, another man of course cannot do. 

Take the case of reputation or fame. What does that amount 
to? If ten men say that we are wise, does that prove that we 
are wise? -That is merely their opinion. If ten thousand men 
said so, would that make the case any stronger? Such is fame, 
such is character. It is only what men say. a good many men 
say — as if that made any difference. Fame is generally based 
upon falsehood, upon a misapprehension, or a misconception and 
misinformation as to facts. Every man knows what he him- 
self is, what he knows and what he can do — or he ought to know 
— but nobody else can have that knowledge. The opinion that 
people form of us is always gratuitous, always fictitious. It is 
not founded upon knowledge, upon truth, upon fact. It is pure 
guesswork. This is evident enough from the mere fact that no 
two people have the same idea of any other man's character. 
One man thinks this and another thinks that ; and sometimes 
they do not think or consider at all, they merely assume. That 
is just what character amounts to in this world. And such is 
fame ! 

Still farther. We are constantly getting credit for what 
other people have done, just as men get rich from what other 
people have earned. It is hard drawing a strict and correct line 
between what a man has done and what he has not done. In 
fact it is very little that a man does alone, that is. without as- 
sistance and co-operation from some source. We do not see how 
a man can claim any credit for anything that he has accom- 
plished. Even the power that enables us to do in the first place 
comes from nature, and the opportunity to do is usually a matter 
over which no man has any control. Men are constantly parad- 
ing in livery that does not belong to them, and they boast of 
deeds for which they deserve no credit whatever. The general 
gets credit for what his subordinates have accomplished, and 
captains get credit for what was really achieved by the men. 
In the departments of government, the heads go away with all 
the honor, while the clerks do the work and are the ones to 
whom the credit properly belongs. 



110 



CHARACTER AND QUALITIES. 



The fact cannot be fixed in the mind too firmly, that no man 
passes for what he really is. He is always rated a little higher or 
a little lower than he should be ; or at least, for some reason, the 
measure applied in his case is not a just one. Moreover, it is a 
mistake to suppose that men possess but one character. Every 
man has really as many characters as he is days old, for no man 
is precisely the same in character one day as another. He has at 
best as many characters as there are people around him who 
form their opinions of him and serve as mirrors in which he is 
reflected. In this case, it will be observed, that much depends 
upon the nature of the mirror, a concave mirror presenting a 
very different image from that of a convex mirror. Yet one is 
as much a mirror as the other, since both are reflectors. If a 
man appears distorted in these reflections, what can he do about 
it? Just so, if his character appears distorted in a newspaper, 
how will he help himself? 

We often ask, how does anything look ? How does a person 
look? That depends upon conditions and circumstances. It de- 
pends upon the point of view, out of ten thousand possible points 
of view. Is it a front view, a back view, a side view, a view 
from this direction or a view from that direction? It is well 
known that the point of view makes a vast difference in the ap- 
pearance of an object as seen by an observer. It depends upon 
the light or shade thrown upon the object. It depends upon the 
feelings and condition of the observer. 

Does a man at all times look alike ? No, he never looks alike 
for two consecutive moments — nothing does. A piece of court 
plaster on the face, spectacles on the nose, or a night-cap on the 
head alters a man's appearance surprisingly. Why talk about 
a man's looks, as if there were some standard or stable view of 
him which he always preserves ? This is a very serious delusion 
that prevails. No two likenesses of a man ever look alike, be- 
cause they are taken under different conditions, and there are al- 
ways striking points of difference in the case. 

What we have said of a man's pictures is true also of his 
character. No man has a stable or standard character. A man 
has a thousand or a million of characters, as there may be a 
thousand or a million points of view from which his picture may 
be taken. When we ask how a man's picture looks or how he 
looks, that is a very indefinite question. When, how taken, by 
whom, from what point of view, and who is the observer? Cir- 
cumstances alter cases as to how a man looks or how he is at any 
moment. How foolish to assume that a man is always the same 
man ! The fact is he is never the same man for any two succes- 



CHARACTER AND QUALITIES. 



Ill 



sive moments. Man is merely a phenomenon, and phenomena 
always change. There is no such thing as rest. 

Every man appears somewhat different to every person with 
whom he is acquainted ; and to himself he appears different 
from what he does to his acquaintances. How then shall we 
assert that a man has only one character ? Napoleon has been 
dead for many years, but people are still drawing sketches of 
both his person and his life. Are there any two of them that 
agree? So it is with the character of Christ, of God, of the Devil. 
Ideas change with the times, and so do sketches and representa- 
tions. 

Most of the characters of prominent men as the world 
understands them come from history. And what is history ? 
Mostly fable. What the historian states is what he believes, 
what he has read, what he has heard. He presents merely the 
view of one man, taken from a single point, and usually with 
some purpose in mind, some prejudice either one way or the 
other. History is being continually revised and rewritten. This 
is an evidence that history is not reliable ; if it were right in 
the first place, it would need no revision, no rewriting. The 
history of Washington in 1783 is not the history of Washington 
as it is written in 1903. These histories are different not only in 
unimportant particulars, but in every essential respect — just as the 
history of a child three years old differs from that of the man of 
forty or seventy years. General Washington died many years ago, 
but from the day of his death, down to the present moment, his 
history has never ceased to change and develop. 

History at best is only a rude picture, a very imperfect 
sketch drawn by a man who has never perhaps seen his subject 
and who draws chiefly from hearsay. Such is history, and on 
such an infirm foundation as" this must the biographies of great 
men rest ! How shall we ever know what great men really 
were ? As a matter of fact, we never can know. It is like a case 
in court which has finally come to an end. We have the decis- 
ion, but we are not any wiser than before. Decisions prove 
nothing ; history proves nothing. What do we know that is 
reliable of David, Solomon, Alexander, Rameses, or even Julius 
Caesar ? Precious little, and even that we are uncertain about. 

Again, what is truth ! It is never what we thought it was. 
We thought it was something tangible, something substantial, 
but how sadly were we mistaken ! Much is said about it, and 
but little is known. For what has history been written thus far? 
Chiefly to glorify kings and conquerors. By whom ? By favor- 
ites who got their pay for their services. 

What character or quality does a thing possess which is 



112 



CHARACTER AND QUALITIES. 



made up of parts or individuals, as all things are found to be? 
A book, a town, or a battle, for instance ? What may safely be 
predicated of one part cannot be truly predicated of another 
part. One part of the Bible is good, and in another part sections 
may be found that to people of refined taste are highly objection- 
able ; so of a town, which has good buildings in one part and 
dilapidated structures in another part. How can we predicate 
anything of a whole town? How can we say it is white or 
yellow or red, when the fact is that only some parts of it are 
yellow or red or white? 

As a matter of fact, bodies which are groups have no quali- 
ties. They exist only as the individuals of which they are con- 
stituted exist, and these always differ in character. We cannot 
comprehend or conceive of a group as one uniform whole, as we 
know it is not such. What character has a dozen men or a half 
dozen horses, all differing from each other as men and horses al- 
ways do ? None whatever. What character have Christians or 
Mahometans, taken as a group or body ? No character. There 
are all sorts of Christians and all sorts of Mahometans. No two 
of them are alike, and when we describe or characterize one 
we never describe or characterize another. So there are all sorts 
of Americans, Irish, Turks and Italians. We cannot speak truth- 
fully of any one of these groups and say they are this or that, or 
something else. We cannot speak of ministers or editors as 
classes with any sort of justice. They have no character inde- 
pendent of the individuals of whom they are composed, and 
these always differ. They have no existence outside of the in- 
dividuals. No two ministers or lawyers or doctors are alike in 
any one particular. Then how shall we describe the group 
which they constitute, and which is nothing but these indivi- 
duals taken together ? They have not the same form and they 
never occupy the same place. They are as distinct and different 
as two beings possibly can be, When we speak of the English, 
we mean at most only a few English. We say that they are tall, 
brave, noble, handsome. But we know very well that all 
Englishmen are not tall, or brave, or noble or handsome. No 
two are alike in any respect. 

It should not be forgotten that the form in which we now 
appear is only one of our forms, and this form is no more our 
proper form than is any one of the others. However, it may be 
more easily perceived and perhaps better understood than other 
forms. We shall exist forever, but not in the present form. 
Take the case of water again. It may be a rock and take the 
form of ice ; it may be a liquid and take that form ; or it may be 
a vapor and take the form of steam — either one as true a form of 

7 



CHARACTER AND QUALITIES. 



113 



water as the other. All solids are composed largely of water, 
and water contains gases. It must be remembered that the solid 
is just as much a natural form of water as the liquid or vapor 
forms. Metals may assume, at different times and under differ- 
ent circumstances, the whole three forms of solid, liquid and 
vapor. 

Does the metal cease to exist when it changes from a per- 
manent solid (permanent only under certain conditions of tem- 
perature, etc.) to a liquid or gas ? Things exist long after we 
fail to see them — as in the gaseous form for example. Is form 
essential to individuality? As we have already intimated, the 
solid is no more a form than the liquid or gas is. Even rocks are 
a form of a liquid. They can be melted, and they always con- 
tain large quantities of water. The earth itself is largely solid, 
but also largely liquid and gaseous. The air is as much a part of 
the earth as the water is, and the water as much as the rocks 
are. 

Finally, most of the objects in this world of which we talk 
and think do not have any forms and they do not affect our 
senses in any way. They do not exist, except in our imagina- 
tion, and there they have a most precarious and ill-defined ex- 
istence. Things that can with any propriety be said to exist 
must affect our senses in some way. But spiritual things, quali- 
ties and various other things do not affect our senses, and so they 
cannot be said to exist. We know indeed that there are no 
spirits, no qualities outside of the things to which these quali- 
ties belong. So it is with groups. They have no actual exist- 
ence so long as their members exist, and when their members 
cease to exist, the groups disappear. This remark applies to all 
cases where the idea of classes enters. There are individual 
trees, but there is no such thing as a tree or any tree. The 
painter paints a tree ; even when he paints some particular tree, 
it is always something quite different from the real tree. At 
best, it only shows one side of a tree, and a view of the tree from 
a single point among ten thousand other points of view. Sup- 
pose we speak of a bird or of birds. We talk about something 
that we could not find. There is not " a bird," nor " birds " as a 
class. There is only this or that or ten thousand other individual 
birds. All our class names apply to things that do not exist out- 
side of the imagination. So we speak of love generally. That 
is very indefinite. It is not something that floats in the air. It 
is only found in the breasts of living creatures. So of words. 
What is the Latin word for ' ' love " ? The pupil responds that it 
is " amo." But it is not amo any more than amat, ama, amans, 
amandum, which are all equally forms of the word. So all 



114 



LOTE UNMASKED. 



matter in general, all substance, as air, water, rock, land, sea, 
light, heat, has no form, no separate, individualized existence, 
and so it cannot affect our senses, nor can it come within the 
sphere of our comprehension. It is individuals alone that we 
can know ; generalities are not intelligible or comprehensible. 
We can think about them and talk about them, but we cannot 
describe or define them, for they are destitute of either limits or 
dimension. 

Our ideas of the character and value of the objects around 
us with which we are supposed to be acquainted vary continu- 
ally, and they never appear to us twice in the same way. The 
sun and moon, for instance, appear small and circular because 
they are distant. If they were twice as near, they would appear 
much larger. The medium also through which we look, as air, 
glass, water, must make a difference in our impressions. The 
same man at ten feet, one hundred feet, a mile, would appear to 
us entirely different. 



CHAPTER VIII. 

LOVE UNMASKED. 

Love may answer very well as a certain spice or balm of 
life, but what shall we say of love as a factor in government or 
religion? Shall love enter into all the relations between man 
and man? Is it a safe guide at any moment? Does it lead men 
to do right or to avoid doing wrong under all circumstances? 
Does it not on the contrary lead to cruelty, injustice and oppres- 
sion, at least in a multitude of instances ? 

In practice love, as well as hate, is blind. It is unreasoning 
and unjust, because the one who loves, or the one who hates, 
sees things in an exaggerated or magnified form. He is in no 
condition to perceive things as they really are, because, for all 
practical purposes, his mind is in a disordered condition, so long 
at least as it is affected by such passions as love and hate. Those 
whom we love appear to us better than they are, and those whom 
we hate as worse than they really are. The weaknesses and de- 
fects of the one we overlook, while the faults of the other we 
magnify. 

No class of people is so exacting, so domineering, so selfish, 
so suspicious, so jealous, so tyrannical as those who love. In 



LOVE UNMASKED. 



115 



fact the leading characteristic of love is its intense selfishness. 
It is made up chiefly of sentiment and appetite. People are 
loved not because they are good, or virtuous or worthy, but be- 
cause they happen to meet some one's interests or strike some 
one's fancy. Love is extremely exclusive in its preferences ; it 
is only a certain few who are loved — not the masses, and seldom 
those who are deserving. We can tell best what love is by ob- 
serving how it operates in practice. Fathers, for example, love 
their children and husbands love their wives. But how do they 
treat them, at least in many cases? Is it always with kindness, 
or even always with justice ? No, such is not history, such are 
not the facts of the case. The model father was the old Roman 
father, and where has the world ever shown a more unrelenting 
tyrant? He loved his son so long as he worshiped, adored and 
obeyed his father. Otherwise the son was hated — for love and 
hate are very closely allied, and the transition from one to the 
other is much easier and more common than is usually supposed. 
The Roman son was often punished, sometimes inhumanly, and 
even in some cases he was killed, by his loving Roman father. 
The modern father is not so stern and so strenuous perhaps, but 
is this parent always just, kind, forgiving, or even humane? 
No, certainly not. In no other case shall we find more shame- 
ful cruelties perpetrated than in some families even at the 
present day. The law makes every father a tyrant, and tyrants 
are never just and never really kind. And so it is in too many 
instances in the relation existing between man and wife. 

If we wish to find the most striking and interesting exem- 
plification of a loving and faithful father, we should consult the 
Bible, where we find God pictured with remarkable power and 
distinctness. Does God love his dear children ? If he does, he 
has a very strange way of manifesting his tender sentiments. 
Apparently he recognizes but one virtue on the part of the peo- 
ple, and that is worship and obedience. His children must not 
only be submissive at all times, following God's will always and 
not their own, but they must also be perpetually performing 
ceremonies and making sacrifices. His constant amusement 
and pastime, it would seem, is the chastisement of his children ! 
And how cruel and unjust he is to the children of other people, 
or to those of other gods ! He loves the children of Israel — or 
claims he does— and he hates with the most implacable hatred 
all other children. Not because they are wicked, or in any sense 
unworthy children, but because they are not his children. Is 
that not precisely the way that love operates among men always, 
at the present day ? They love those whom they love, those that 
are near to them, those that worship, obey and serve them, and 



116 



LOVE UNMASKED. 



everybody else they hate. Such is love, and so it always has 
been. That is its nature. Love always implies haU — love of some 
and hate of others. How quickly is love, even in its most highly 
developed state, transformed into hate ! How often do we read 
of one lover killing another because of the selfishness of passion ! 
Barry Johnson killed Kate Hassett with as little mercy as a 
policeman might show to a mad dog. " I loved her so," was his 
excuse. Mrs. Whitten poisoned her two little daughters and 
then strangled herself, all for love of a suitor who objected to 
her children. Lottie Besseger fatally shot herself — for love of 
the man her older sister was about to marry. 

Love is never constant — it is whimsical, fanciful, capricious 
in the extreme. It is never based on merit— always on fancy. 
The one who is loved may not change or deteriorate in the 
slightest degree, and yet he may cease to retain the love that he 
once enjoyed — and for no other reason than that the lover has 
changed his mind, or found some one that he likes better. How 
often does the husband abandon a beautiful and loving wife and 
bestow his new-born affections upon some miserable strumpet, 
just for the novelty of a change ! No, nothing is so mean in 
fact, so contemptible, as love ; and no one is so fickle, so heart- 
less, and so utterly unworthy of recognition by sensible people, 
as the lover. Nothing that is built up solely on love can last, and 
that is the reason why so many marriages prove to be failures. 
Respect and esteem have some basis, some foundation, and they 
are worthy of some regard; but love is a will-o'-the-wisp that 
has never yet been caught, never been examined, and therefore 
it has never been fully understood. Its only office is to mislead 
those who are too unsuspecting and too confiding. 

And yet we hear a great deal about love, especially in con- 
nection with religious matters — God is love, the Bible is love, and 
we Christian people are love, making a very loving combination 
all together. But how much of this talk is really any more than 
twaddle ? People talk constantly about love, and yet we doubt 
very much if. they know the genuine article when they come 
across it. It is very common as a disorder, and almost every- 
body, even the humblest has had a touch of it, more or less, some 
time in the course of a long life. But what is it? Nobody 
knows, or if anybody knows, he is sure not to tell. Strange as it 
may seem, it is comparatively a modern production. The Greeks 
knew little or nothing of the passion ; and so it was with the 
ancients generally. The Orientals to-day, the natives of un- 
civilized countries, and many people even in enlightened Europe, 
have no conception of love as we find it exemplified in America. 
The Greeks loved art ; they loved men as well as women, be- 



LOVE UNMASKED. 



117 



cause they loved art, but they had no such love as we prate 
about. Love in families, or family ties, as they are called, were 
not known among men originally as they are now known among 
the civilized races. Even affection for offspring, as it is found in 
the lower animals, is confined to a limited period, during the 
helplessness of the young. 

We have a beautiful illustration of love in government as it 
is developed in our modern state. The state takes the place of a 
wise and powerful father. If it does not exactly love its chil- 
dren it certainly protects them, proceeding always upon the 
doctrine, absurd as it is, that the children would fall into the 
fire or tumble over some precipice, if the state did not thus exer- 
cise its watchful care continually and afford that protection 
which is deemed to be indispensable. It demands in return the 
constant love and devotion of all its children, and as a proof of 
that love and devotion, frequent sacrifices are required. Punish- 
ments — some of them of a most distressing character — are fre- 
quently inflicted, that being the way in which masters and 
tyrants show their affection. A love that does not sacrifice for 
others is no love at all. Through sacrifices alone love demon- 
strates its fidelity. 

We have had a religion of love in the form of Christianity 
for nineteen hundred years, and what has been the result? 
What has been the history of the civilized world during that 
time? Have we had peace ? No, we have had what Christ him- 
self promised to the world, a sword. When was the world ever 
more wicked, when was the time in which more blood was shed, 
and when was it that human suffering and sacrifice were 
greater in amount and intensity than they have been during these 
nineteen centuries? Instead of being a religion of love, we 
should rather say it was a religion of tragedies and suffering. 
We have little besides slaughter and misery in some form to 
record during all this remarkable period. 

What is the project of Christianity, according to the pub- 
lished plan of redemption ? To save a few and punish the re- 
mainder. Such is love always — "many are called, but few are 
chosen." It is the elect, the favored few only, who are saved. 
The rest are damned from eternity, and they are damned to-day. 
Man is like an infant in the hands of irresistible Fate. By no 
possible effort of his own could he save himself. Good works 
avail not. He is either damned or not damned, according as it 
was from the beginning. This is the doctrine of fatalism. The 
Mahometans have caught the spirit of Bible teaching better than 
we have. They are all pronounced fatalists, every one of them. 
They make excellent slaves ; they assume that they were born to 



118 



LOVE UNMASKED. 



serve, and to suffer. That is their destiny and hence they sub- 
mit meekly. 

Let us consider this business of love still farther. Whom do 
we love? Is it everybody? No. we love only our friends and 
favorites, those who serve us and gratify us in some way. It is 
sometimes said that Christians love their enemies, but that is 
only in exceptional cases, when their enemies become friends. 
Do we love strangers ? Is there not some motive of action in 
this life loftier and worthier than love ? Is there no disinterested 
kindness, no sacrifice to be made or service to be performed with- 
out hope of compensation in some form? Can we not be just 
and generous even to those in whom we have no interest ? Paid 
virtue, virtue that expects its reward or gratification in some 
form, is not virtue in the proper sense of the term. If a man at 
the risk of his life jumps into the water to save a drowning child 
which he has never seen before, is that noble action prompted in 
the slightest degree by love ? 

It should not be forgotten that love has absolutely nothing 
to do with justice, kindness, gentleness or even with nobleness 
at any time. Love has no connection whatever with proper con- 
duct ; it has no connection with merit in any form. To do good 
to people because we love them, is no more to our credit than it 
is to do good because we are paid for it. We may be paid for an 
unworthy action, just as we may love people who do not deserve 
recognition. Love never discriminates. 

" God so loved the world that he gave his only begotten son, 
that whosoever believed on him might be saved. " So loved the 
world ! How did he love the world ? As those who love always 
do. in a partial, conditional; selfish, despotic manner. He did not 
love all the world. He only loved a small portion of the world, 
those who believed on him, submitted to him. worshiped him. 

In practice, in active business affairs, in government and 
even in religion, love is not a principle or a feeling on which men 
can depend. Love is a matter of feeling and it never follows the 
direction which sense and reason indicates. Love is passion, and 
in its advanced stages it is akin to madness. What kind of a 
judge or what kind of a legislator would a man make who acted 
under the influence of love ? He would not be just, he would 
not be reasonable. He would favor the one he loved or admired 
— some handsome woman perhaps, or some one that he pitied — 
and condemn the other party. 

No, there is no place for love in practice, in the ordinary 
affairs of life. It might answer as a diversion for children and 
silly folks, but not for grown up men and women. Even when 
connected with marriage, it is evidently the source of much 



LOVE UNMASKED. 



119 



more misery than happiness. There are so many disappoint- 
ments ; lovers are so fickle . and they are so easily diverted in 
other directions ; people are so fond of conquests, and then they 
are so selfish and so unjust ! Are love matches, those matches 
which are supposed to be made in heaven, always happy ? Is it 
not rather the fact that love marriages are rarely happy ? What 
is immensely better than love at all times is justice, sense and 
reason. Justice and reason are things for all alike, and they are 
never for the few. Moreover, they have nothing to do with love. 
No grace, no pardon, no favoritism is desirable in any case. 
What is wanted is a just judge, if we are to have any judge at 
all, and then men will not forfeit their rights and their independ- 
ence, no matter what happens. 

If Christianity teaches anything, it teaches the doctrine of 
love, of love for everybody, and especially love for our neigh- 
bor. But no such rule, we venture to say, was ever put in prac- 
tice to any extent in any age or country. It is a good topic to 
moralize upon, but it will not work in practice — not at least in a 
selfish world like ours. On a basis of love, in the form in which 
society now presents itself, humanity would soon go into a state 
of bankruptcy and decay. 

Love is opposed to independence ; we must love our parents 
who are over us, we must especially love our masters, and above 
all we must love God who is the father of us all. But as a matter 
of fact we cannot love our masters, though we may fear them. 
Nor can we love such a mythical and mysterious being as God — 
that were impossible. We cannot love ghosts and spirits, especi- 
ally when we are unable to find them ; we cannot love light, or 
sound, or air, nor even the earth itself, as the term is commonly 
understood. Love is essentially carnal. 

Why should we love people ? W T hat should we do when we 
love them — what difference should we make between people 
whom we love and those whom we do not love ? Can we not 
be kind to people, can we not aid them, can we not be just to 
them without loving them? If we have love for everybody, it 
must be with a different kind of affection from that with which 
we are now acquainted. As it is now we love only a few, a very 
few who are our intimate friends, and these we love so long only 
as we have selfish ends in view. We love them because they are 
our friends — we would not think of loving the friends of some- 
one else. Love is wholly a matter of personal gratification or 
personal satisfaction. 

The Bible would seem to tell us of a disinterested love, but 
no such thing ever has existed or ever could exist for a moment. 
The love that the Bible implies is a chimera, a matter purely of 



120 



LOVE UNMASKED. 



the imagination alone, like ghosts, witches and hobgoblins. At 
any rate when we employ the word love in any such connection 
as this, we are making use of an inapt term. 

As a matter of fact and of record, we really love nobody — 
nobody but our own dear selves. To all else we are indifferent 
at all times. Whatever does not affect our interests does not 
concern us. We love those who minister to our pleasures in 
some way, and that is a sensible, natural kind of love, though 
of course it is nothing when it is not selfish. We love people 
only who are handsome, who please us according to our tastes. 
Love is a mysterious matter of affinity between two persons, 
and the question of principle or of merit is not involved in the 
business for one moment. Let us hear no more of loving our 
neighbor merely because he is our neighbor— the pretence is un- 
questionably a fraud in all its bearings. That love should have 
any merit, we should love everybody, no matter how ill-looking 
nor whose neighbor he might be. It should be noted here that 
loving everybody in general is the same as loving nobody in 
particular. 

Love of mankind is not something that can be rendered sub- 
ject to the will ; it cannot be controlled by commands, even though 
they came from God himself. In this respect it is like love of 
music, love of birds, love of poetry, or even love of beefsteak. 
The will has nothing to do with questions of that character. We 
like and dislike things because they are as they are and we are 
as we are. If we were different, or the things were different, 
we would certainly like something else. Our likes and dislikes 
have nothing to do with morals. 

There is really no benefit accruing to society from the Bible 
doctrine of love. God loved his children, but, as we have seen, 
he punished them unmercifully, even unreasonably. And why 
did he punish them ? Simply because he loved them. If he had 
been indifferent to them, he would have let them go their own 
way and made no effort to restrain them. No man takes the 
trouble to punish other people's children — he has all he can do to 
care for his own. It is his privilege and his duty to punish his 
children, because he loves them ! He considers it good for them, 
necessary, and therefore eminently proper. He actually believes 
that sparing the rod would spoil the child. There is such a thing 
as being loved too well. Those who love always demand great 
sacrifices in return for their affections and loyalty. What a man 
often gets by having another man for a friend is a chance to go 
on his bond or lend him ten dollars in case of need. You could 
not refuse a friend ! 

Love unrequited turns into the bitterest hatred. Men do not 



LOVE UNMASKED. 



121 



love for the pleasure of loving, but for the pleasure of being 
loved and of being served. Love is above all things a matter of 
self -gratification, and therefore there is nothing about it that is 
either commendable or praiseworthy. We love good food, but 
only because we desire it to eat — duck or turkey for instance. 
We love pictures and art generally, but only for the enjoyment 
that is afforded. 

The one to be pitied in this world is the one whom everybody 
loves and admires. It is unfortunate for a woman to be called 
remarkably handsome, and it is equally unfortunate for a man 
to be exceedingly popular. What is the fate of every handsome 
bird, or of handsome animals generally ? What is commonly 
the fate of the woman whose beauty is considered phenomenal ? 
In nine cases out of ten, she is sought after continually, per- 
secuted with attention — and perhaps petted, tempted and ruined 
at last. And to be popular is to encounter the same fate. How 
many popular men have gone down to a drunkard's grave, bank- 
rupt both in purse and character ! Between the two, it is really 
better to be hated too much than to be loved too much. Indeed, 
there is certainly something wrong about a person who is loved 
too much, as well as about a person who is hated too much. 

There are some batteries available against hate, but abso- 
lutely none against love. Of your enemies you expect nothing, 
and you are seldom disappointed. It is different with friends. 
You often expect much from them, but when the day of actual 
trial comes, it is very little that you receive. To suspect love is 
treason — and still more to prepare to defend yourself against any 
possible attack from that source. Nations often meet with this 
very same unpleasant condition of things. But with your ene~ 
mies you need not be modest at all, and if you are sensible, you 
will always be on your guard. You always know where to find 
your enemies, or at least in what direction to look for them ; but 
with those who are supposed to love you, the case is quite dif- 
ferent. Love is so inconstant, and people are so apt to experi- 
ence a change of heart, especially where self-interest comes into 
play, that a man who has friends never knows just what may 
happen at any time. 

Enmity strengthens, incites, encourages, developes. Dangers 
and difficulties sharpen the intellect as nothing else will. They 
even add strength to the muscles. With love the result is of a 
different character. If you love and are loved, you simply sur- 
render and enter the hypnotic state. That is the last of you. You 
are absolutely nobody worth speaking about after that — at least, 
so long as the passion lasts. We cry out against our pains, suffer- 
ings and sorrows. But what would men amount to without 



122 



LOVE UNMASKED. 



these things ? What has been the history of every man who had 
nothing to do, no obstacles to overcome, no troubles to encoun- 
ter, no enemies to resist? No man has ever yet in all this world 
been able to accomplish anything when there was nothing for 
him to do, no resistance to meet, and no labor to perform. 

The author of this book is certainly not teaching a religion 
of love, nor any doctrine that has not for its basis something 
more substantial than mere affection. A religion of love implies 
a religion of fear — fear and love are two elements that cannot be 
separated. All through the Bible we are taught that we must 
love God, because we dread him. Love is not left to us as a 
matter of choice ; we must love God any way, because we are so 
commanded and we are his children. We must honor our 
parents (that is, love them) because we dread their wrath, which 
is always one of the concomitants of love. While our religion is 
emphatically a religion of love, it must also be remembered that 
it is also a religion of wrath, of sorrow, of misery and of distress. 

What this author teaches is the religion of good will to all 
men; of justice, propriety and fairness at all times; of respect 
for everybody's sentiments and feelings, and of a due regard for 
the rights of every one with whom we are called upon to asso- 
ciate. This course is a great deal better, a thousand times better, 
in practice, than that of love ; it leads to peace and prosperity, so 
far as it is possible for such things to exist in a world constituted 
like ours. 



CHAPTER IX. 



CAUSE AND EFFECT. 

Men are continually confounding cause and effect and mis- 
taking one for the other. This is true not only in physics but in 
government, and herein lies the one great source of most of our 
troubles. We are continually taking nostrums to cure us of 
certain diseases, but we never know to a certainty whether they 
help us or not. We might have got well without the nostrums — 
and then we might not. 

Causes are queer things. We think the homeopaths are cor- 
rect, and if it is the medicine that produces the effect, the 
quantity has nothing to do with the result, and a small dose 
would answer just as well as a large one. If it is iron that raises 
a weight, it is the metal and not the quantity that does the busi- 
ness. Suppose it requires five pieces to raise a certain weight, 
which is the one that does it — four will not. Does the fifth do 
the whole thing ? No, it requires four more with it to make the 
effort a success. Does the last feather break the camel's back, or 
must other feathers join with it ? Is it the last step that takes a 
man to his destination, or must he have the help of the other 
steps ? If it takes five thousand men to do a job, four thousand 
nine hundred and ninety- nine would make a failure of the un- 
dertaking. It requires the help of the extra man. But why 
should he boast? Why should any man boast? We can do 
nothing in this world alone. We could not even breathe unless 
we had the help of the atmosphere, and some other things be- 
sides. 

When we come finally to have new views of causes, we shall 
have a truer conception of nature and her operations. We shall 
then have no concern about a Creator, or Great First Cause, a 
being of whom we know absolutely nothing and whose assist- 
ance we never receive nor require. We shall cease to think or 



124 



CAUSE AND EFFECT. 



speak of the works of Providence, of special interposition, of 
divinities, demons, and spirits of all kinds. 

The time has come when people should have new ideas on 
the subject of causes. There are no real causes ; no one cause 
produces some other thing as a direct result. There can be only 
one cause for an effect ; but as a matter of fact, we know that 
several factors always unite to produce a result, and one alone 
will never suffice. We speak of the causes of war, and we know 
that a great many events, a great many separate and independent 
factors, must unite to produce a war in any country. Igniting a 
match may be the last step in a series of steps that lead to an ex- 
plosion. But the match alone cannot be called the cause of the 
trouble, since it is well known that matches properly handled 
and kept in their place never lead to accidents. 

Men talk rapturously about causes, and yet have they any- 
thing like a clear and definite notion of the nature of causes ? 
We speak of the cause of a disease, when in fact there is no 
cause of a disease — no single cause, which a cause must be, if it 
properly is a cause. Perhaps ten thousand things conspire to 
produce a certain disease, if it is produced at all. We sometimes 
say that we raise corn, but that is a sort of allegorical expression 
which has no real signification. We do not raise corn — no one 
does that. We merely help to bring the conditions together 
that enable corn to grow, and to eliminate any one of the condi- 
tions or causes would spoil the job. We tell of what this man or 
that man has done or accomplished, when as a matter of fact no 
man ever accomplishes anything through his own unaided ex- 
ertions. 

It must be noted that we speak recklessly and inaccurately 
at all times. We speak nothing truly. We delight in hyper- 
boles. If what we say is partially true, that is as much as can 
generally be expected. We say a man builds a machine, but as 
a matter of fact he really builds or produces very little of it. 
He merely puts parts together according to a certain plan or ar- 
rangement, and that is all. He does not produce even a par- 
ticle of the material, and the power that moves the machine 
never emanates from himself. Every mechanic is at best merely 
an agent or an instrument of nature. Men say God does this or 
that, and electricity and the spirits do certain other things. But 
people talk at random, and there is about as much sense in their 
utterances in such cases as there is in the cackling of geese or the 
croaking of frogs. 

All the causes that we contemplate — all the natural causes as 
we call them — are those spirits of old, or demons, which in olden 
times were supposed to lie concealed in certain things. The 



CAUSE AND EFFECT. 



125 



whole theory of causes comes from the Bible, a fruitful source 
from which many fables have been derived. Gravity is a cause, 
a mysterious and unknown agent ; so are cohesion and combus- 
tion ; and in fact all the phenomena of nature, according to 
ancient doctrines, are the work of spirits. 

If there is a cause, it must be a matter of will ; a cause im- 
plies design, a First Great Cause. But what is it that causes the 
will, the motive ? That is something that we cannot determine. 
We are not able to go back of the motive. We know we did not 
create it, and we cannot control it. So we are not responsible 
for our motives and hence we are not responsible for our actions. 

It is futile to discuss the question of causes, seeing that really 
there are no causes. There are occasions, opportunities, condi- 
tions — but there are no real causes. In all cases, the damage 
that is occasioned by causes comes from an unfortunate combina- 
tion of circumstances. It is not the stone on the track, or the 
putting it on, that does the work, in case of an accident, but the 
train's coming along at an inopportune moment, and perhaps 
also the fact that no guard was present to remove the stone in 
season. And if some one is killed, it happens because he is on 
the train, and because he is in the wrong car. There is no end 
of causes, if you start to examine the case critically and care- 
fully. It cannot be the medicine alone that cures a man, or it 
would cure every patient every time. But if a man is cured, it 
depends upon very many things — his own particular condition, 
his treatment, his age s the weather, and many other circum- 
stances. It cannot be gravity that draws bodies down to the 
center of the earth, for the boat that floats on the water and the 
balloon that rises in the air do not fall, though gravity acts in 
their cases as well as in others. 

The power that brings about action in bodies resides in the 
bodies themselves. Two bodies cannot act upon each other, for 
it is well known that they never touch each other, and most 
certainly one cannot enter the limits of the other. The seed that 
finally germinates may have lain dormant, awaiting the favor- 
able moment, perhaps for centuries. The power is there and 
cannot be destroyed, but it cannot proceed with its development 
without help from sources outside of itself. 

Not only are there no true causes, but there are no true 
results. Things are not caused, not produced, and they are not 
created. They always existed. What is, must have been from 
the beginning. The train that passes us at any moment was 
somewhere else an hour before, and it will be in another place 
an hour later. When the sun goes down, it does not cease to 
exist ; we may not see it, but people on other portions of the 



126 



CAUSE AND EFFECT. 



earth see it. And again, when to-morrow conies, it is not a new 
sun that has been created or produced by some cause, some 
special interposition of Providence, but merely the same sun 
coming along in the natural course of things. What is there 
mysterious about the whole proceeding ? 

It must not be forgotten that every case of cause and effect, 
according to the prevailing theory, must be a new creation, a 
special interposition by Providence. We act upon the assump- 
tion that nature cannot do its own work, but that there is a God, 
Providence, outside of nature, that does all that is to be done. 
He is the one Great Cause acting constantly and forever ! That 
is simply astounding ! As a matter of fact there is no such God, 
and consequently there are no cases of cause and effect. There 
are no special visitations ; things come and go in the natural 
course of things, and never in any other manner. 

Let us cease to worry over the why and the wherefore of 
things. It belongs to a child to ask such questions. When we 
explain things, we merely state them over in another form. 
Why does a body fall, why is flame hot and marble cold ? Why 
do some people live and other people die ? Any simple person 
can ask questions, but it is not every wise man that can answer 
them. There are some things that men do not know and never 
will know. 

It will be noticed that this question of cause and effect is 
identical with the question of Providence. If there is no real 
cause and effect, as we have seen there is not, there cannot be a 
Providence, for there is nothing for Providence to do. Indeed, 
we now begin to realize that, of the great multitude of things 
that Providence is supposed to have done, not one can properly 
be passed to his credit. And so with the supposed achievements 
of man — they all come to naught. No man can properly be said 
to do anything, for he does nothing alone. At best man can only 
do what is possible, what circumstances allow Mm to do. No 
man can boast of his power, for he has none. For any and every 
achievement that he claims as his own, he needs the support of 
nature and the co-operation of the world. 

We shall soon cease to talk about what we have done — what 
this man has done, what any man has done, or what anything 
has done. Asa matter of fact, no man of himself does, or can 
do, anything. How absurd! We say a doctor cures a man. 
Shall he give no credit to God, to nature, to the climate, to the 
patient himself, to the co-operation of circumstances, and per- 
haps to the effect of the medicine ? How ridiculous is the claim 
as to what we do, when the truth is that, properly speaking, we 
never do anything — certainly we never do anything alone, which 



CAUSE AND EFFECT. 



127 



we must do, if we do it at all. What reward shall we claim ? 
Why, a man could not raise his hand without a thousand con- 
spiring and co-operating circumstances to favor and assist him, 
such as the opportunity to raise it, the occasion or inclination to 
raise it, the motive to raise it, and finally the power to raise it, 
as well as the knowing how to raise it. 

If we could see and understand the realities of this world, 
we should perceive that there are perhaps a million of different 
elements or influences that enter into so simple an operation as 
the raising of one's hand. Take for instance the forces that send 
a ball in a certain direction. No one alone, or a dozen, but a 
thousand forces from different directions enter into that one 
movement of the ball. These thoughts are not dreams, they are 
not wild vagaries. They are facts which every thinking and 
intelligent man understands and concedes. A cord looks simple 
enough, but it is made up of innumerable strands. The stream 
of water that flows gently by looks like a very simple thing. 
But it is made up of a million subordinate little streams, each 
striving to make its way on its own account. At a distance it 
looks like a single thing ; on closer inspection, it is found to be 
made up of an indefinite number of individual streams of a lower 
order. 



CHAPTER X. 



EXPRESSION AND RELATION. 

What is an expression ? How are expressions made — through 
what medium and in what manner? These, and all similar ques- 
tions, are not easy to answer ; and when an answer is attempted, 
it is not generally satisfactory. The idea of expression of any 
kind is a late development in the human mind, and its true 
character has never yet been clearly understood. Man in his 
natural, uncultivated state has little knowledge of expression. 
He hardly realizes what it is. His collection of words is small, 
because he has few ideas. He hardly understands that words 
express anything, in the sense that civilized men understand 
the term. Even of pictures he has but an imperfect conception, 
unless they are very rude and simple. In this respect natives 
are like the lower animals ; they have almost no idea at all of 
pictures and reflection. They know nothing of perspective and 
very little of the effect of shading. 

It is clear enough that there is no such thing as expression 
or representation in the sense in which we understand the term. 
We know that there is and can be no connection of any kind be- 
tween separate things ; and that if they were connected, they 
would not be separate. We know that nothing has any power 
of expression, certainly not the power of expressing something 
entirely outside of itself. We say a sentence expresses, but we 
shall find, when we come to examine the subject closely and 
carefully, that all the expression of which we talk so much is in 
our minds. The words of which a sentence are composed are 
each distinct individualities. How can they be forced to unite 
in such a manner as to produce an expression, or even to repre- 
sent an idea? Words are nothing but sounds, or if written or 
printed, they are merely the signs of sounds. There is no real 
difference in character between words in language and the letters 

8 



EXPRESSION AND RELATION. 



129 



and signs that are so dextrously manipulated in mathematical 
operations. In both cases they are merely arbitrary or conven- 
tional signs used to aid man in his calculations and reflections. 
Their realm is the spiritual, not the material. 

Pictures are closely allied to words and signs. A picture 
does not really express or represent anything outside of itself. 
To say that it is connected with some other object, or represents 
it in any way, is an expression that is wholly gratuitous. A 
likeness may represent this man or that man, or some other man. 
How shall we ever know which ? We never can know except 
by inquiring of the artist, and with him it is merely a matter of 
purpose or intention. How shall we ever know that a picture 
represents a horse? Not only in the case of children, but also 
in the case of adults, pictures must be labeled before we can 
know exactly what they are meant to represent. Can we get an 
idea of what we have never seen or heard, even from a picture? 
Only so far as there is a resemblance to something with which 
we are acquainted. 

No likeness is a true likeness in any case ; the best are full 
of defects, and most of them are ideal, rather than real. And 
whether we see a horse in a picture or not, depends very much 
upon ourself , upon the state of our mind and our advancement 
in science. A horse might look at a picture without having the 
slightest suspicion that it was meant to represent him. He 
might even see his reflection in a mirror without realizing what 
it was connected with. It is not clear that a horse notices a 
a reflection, though dogs sometimes do. 

It must not be overlooked that expressions of all kinds are 
largely, if not wholly, in the mind of the observer. An Israelite 
sees in a page of Hebrew what a Greek does not see, though both 
look at the same page. What does such a page express ? Noth- 
ing. In the case of the Jew it develops thoughts or ideas by 
association. In the case of the Greek not familiar with the 
Hebrew there is no such experience. So in reading a page of 
our language. We see in it at one time what we did not at an- 
other ; and another man reading the same page would find in it 
a great many things that, to our mind, are quite imperceptible. 

To get an impression, it requires an observer as well as the 
thing observed. Neither alone will answer. The printed page 
has no value, no expression, if it remains unseen, or if it is seen 
by one who is not in a condition to interpret it. So it is with 
everything in nature. One thing expresses as much as another — 
everything expresses — but the conditions must be favorable. 
There must be an interpreter and something to be interpreted. 

What one man finds in the Bible, or in any other book, differs- 



130 



EXPRESSION AND RELATION. 



greatly from what another man finds there — and if he does not 
read, he will not find anything at all. Some people can look at 
the Egyptian hieroglyphics and get thoughts and information 
from them. Not so with others who are not acquainted with the 
character and meaning of these signs. Words, pictures, sketclies — 
all these are mere signs calling up ideas already existing in the minds of 
men. People who have no knowledge, no ideas of then- own. 
never learn and never derive any benefit from what they read 
or see. All objects in nature perform, to a greater or less extent., 
about the same office that words and pictures do. All express, 
all indicate, all are the occasion for the development of ideas in 
the minds of those who observe. 

So it is also in music, or in art. To" an Arab, Arabic music is 
a source of delight, but to a European it is merely a painful 
racket. The ancient Greeks had their music, and they deemed 
it charming. But we to-day would call it very crude and even 
intolerable. 

Nothing, it must be borne in mind, has any fixed character 
or expression of its own. An Indian reads a great deal more in 
footprints, or in other traces, than a European could possibly find 
in them. It is all in ourselves, our training, our acquirements 
and capacity. It is well known that the artist sees a hundred 
beauties in his picture that the common observer never perceives. 
As already intimated, there is no picture of a thing — it is merely 
a sign or sketch to call to mind a certain thing of which we had 
some knowledge or conception before. 

All things are signs. The flag, which is merely a piece of 
cloth with colors, is a sign, a symbol ; three links call to mind 
the Odd Fellows order ; the letters F. & A. M., the Masonic 
fraternity. U. S. means United States, for us, quite as much as 
the words themselves do. A certain sign, $, means dollars, No. 
signifies number and so on. They have no connection with other 
objects, but by custom or common consent, the one is associated 
with the other, the sign with the thing signified. Tilings ex- 
press simply through suggestions which awaken thoughts in our 
minds. So music expresses, so gestures and dancing express, so 
words express, and so everything expresses. 

We dwell much upon intention, motives, purposes, but it is 
impossible to connect them with results. What has intention to 
do with any matter? Men are concerned about results or effects, 
and not at all about intentions. What a man's intentions were 
in using certain words in a particular instance can have no 
effect upon the character or expression of the words themselves. 
They mean what they mean, but not always the same thing to 
different men. If a man draws a sketch of a horse, but meant 



EXPRESSION AND RELATION. 



131 



it for a pig, that does not help matters in the least. His inten- 
tions do not enter into the case. The question is, what does the 
sketch actually represent? So in speaking, if a man says 
"horse," what matters it if he meant "cow?" Again, give a 
man $10. What is it for ? How shall the world ever know ? 
Intentions have nothing to do with the case. Intention or pur- 
pose or thought can never connect two actions or two objects 
that have no connection. Saying a thing is so, or that such and 
such were the intentions, determines absolutely nothing in this or 
in any other case. Saying there is a man in the moon, or that 
electricity is a current that runs through or along a wire, does 
not make it so. If we give a man a sum of money, that is all 
there is of it. Nothing we can do or say can characterize it or 
determine it in any way. So we say a man goes to Albany. 
His going has no relation to Albany. He merely goes and keeps 
going. 

What signs indicate, what they express, depends wholly 
upon what we know. If we know nothing, they express or in- 
dicate nothing. It is like a case of concerted signals. To out- 
siders who do not know the code, they are meaningless. So with 
all signs. To some they mean much, to others little, and to 
others still they mean nothing. Alone there is nothing that 
means anything. Signs alone have no signification — they are 
only for those who have the code, for those who know. The 
meaning is wholly in the observer. Such is language, such is 
expression of all kinds. We see a building. Is it a house, a 
barn, a seminary or a castle? The building alone does not reveal 
its character. Before we can decide that, we must have knowl- 
edge, we must know its uses. 

There are no real likenesses of things, no images, as there are 
no parts of things. What we call images are unconnected and 
independent things, like other objects, and like the things which 
are supposed to be represented. A statue is no more an image 
than a tombstone is. Both are simply chiseled forms of marble, 
and absolutely nothing more. If we find a head in marble, how 
shall we ever know whose head it is ? It is nobody's head. It 
may resemble Caesar, and even then not be Caesar's. Nature 
paints flowers, and men paint flowers, but the flowers that na- 
ture paints have nothing to do with the flowers (so called) that 
men paint. There is hardly a resemblance in this case — cer- 
tainly no identity or connection. 

Words, all words, are ambiguous, because they really ex- 
press nothing. They have no well defined character — they have 
no meaning. They are quite conventional. They express one 
thing to one man and another thing to another man; they simply call 



132 



EXPRESSION AND RELATION. 



up by suggestion different ideas in each case. Take the word 
•■horse." "virtue." ••trunk.'" Alone they mean nothing. There 
are many kinds of horses, virtues, trunks. We must have some 
other sign, some determinative by which we can ascertain which 
is intended. The dictionary does not tell us what a word means. 
It only gives a few of its meanings, and leaves the inquirer to 
figure the matter out for himself. So the word " sweet." •' love, 55 
and indeed all words, have many meanings or applications. 
Words that mean several things must really mean nothing. 
Again, words are mere tags or marks to designate things, just 
as we call this building " A" or " No. 3." All the meaning that 
words have is what we attribute to them. 

Every step we take in our inquiries reminds us that there is 
in nature no such thing as connections or relations. All things 
that exist are unconnected,, unrelated, arid independent. A man 
strikes a blow, and a month or a year later, we strike a blow. 
How could we say with any propriety that the two acts or events 
have any connection or relation? And still we are constantly 
assuming that things are connected and related, that this is the 
cause of that or the effect of this, that the blow is in re- 
venge or compensation, or a punishment for some antecedent act. 
Connections and relations are ideas merely with which we amuse 
ourselves. We connect stars in the heavens with imaginary 
lines and construct figures of bears, goats and other animals, but 
these images or figures are wholly and solely in our minds. 

So in music, each note is independent and really discordant : 
one note is higher than another, and the two really have no rela- 
tion or connection whatever. The same is true of two different 
kevs. Again, the note on a flute is one thing, and the same note 
on a violin is another thing, though called by the same name : 
and on the piano it has still another character, and yet the three 
instruments may be played in concert and make what we call 
symphony ! Harmony is said to be an adaptation of parts to 
each other. How can they be adapted, in a case where each is 
known to be independent of the other? So we observe that 
many objects form a landscape. But where is the harmony be- 
tween the great number of independent things that unite to pro- 
duce the effect ? Harmony and concord, order and system, are 
wonderful things. How can they be said to exist, when ail 
things are known to be different and disconnected ? Harmony 
springs from discord in all cases, and so good comes from evil 
in other instances. 

Men cannot possibly get correct ideas on any subject. In- 
deed, there are no correct ideas. Men's ideas come from sugges- 
tion, from association, from what they see and hear, and especi- 



EXPRESSION AND RELATION. 



133 



ally from language. But what medium could be more unsafe, 
more imperfect or more unsatisfactory every way than that of 
language ? Words really express nothing. As we have seen, 
they are merely signs, which some interpret one way and some 
another. A sentence is merely an assemblage of independent 
conventional signs which together have no more of what might 
be called true expression than there is to be found in the collec- 
tive signs of an algebraic equation or in so many pieces of wood. 
If a word expresses nothing, how could a collection of words be 
expected to do any better ? 

No word signifies precisely the same thing for any two per- 
sons. Every word has a great many different meanings and ap- 
plications. The dictionary gives some of those meanings, but it 
rarely tells what a word means in a certain place or connection. 
How shall a man know exactly what a word means in a particu- 
lar sentence? As a matter of fact, he never does. He gets an 
approximation, he conjectures — that is all. How shall he ever 
know what the writer intended when he used a particular word ? 
He never can know. The writer and the reader are practically 
as far apart as the earth is from the sun. Each has his own 
thoughts, his own thoughts only, and they never can understand 
each other. People can never be brought together. 

With such an imperfect means of communication as we 
have, is it any wonder that error prevails, that we are never fully 
understood*, and that whether we read or listen, we get at 
most only an approximation to the truth in any case? Is it 
any wonder that no two people read the Bible alike, that no two 
judges interpret the laws like ? This all arises from the imper- 
fection of our means of communication, joined to the weaknesses 
of the one who interprets, to his want of knowledge, his preju- 
dices, his want of care, his whims, his interests, his passions, his 
feelings, his health, all of which things have a direct influence 
upon a man's thoughts and understanding, and finally upon his 
judgment. 

When we consider the imperfect and unreliable means of 
communication that is to be found in every direction, together 
with the well known carelessness of men in seeing, hearing and 
understanding, what wonder should there be that we find so 
little truth in this world ? We do not know what truth is, and 
we would not have the means of properly expressing it, if we did 
know. We have the erroneous impression that we obtain knowl- 
edge solely through books and language. The fact is that every- 
thing around us has its expression and gives us knowledge. 
There are "sermons in stones," and "books in the running 
brooks." The American savage, who is a keen observer, gets 



134 



OUR CONFUSED IDEAS. 



more valuable information from a few footprints, or from other 
apparently unimportant signs, than a learned man would obtain 
from a chapter in some profound work. This same savage can 
carry on an extended conversation with his fellow, by means of 
signs, without uttering a single word, and two mutes in civilized 
life could do the same thing in a little different manner. 



CHAPTER XL 



OUR CONFUSED IDEAS. 

The language we use and the terms we employ show clearly 
that our ideas are confused and our notions of things are far 
from being correct. We are constantly stating things as we 
know they are not. We say the road runs to Albany, when we 
know that it never moves. It stays where it is, no part but the 
remotest end ever touching Albany, and it is well known that 
the end of a road is never the road itself. We say a cable 
stretches from one place to another. But how can anything 
stretch or extend from one place to another place ? How can 
anything be in two places at the same time ? It is utterly im- 
possible. If a man's feet are in one place and his head in an- 
other, where is the man really ? We say the river runs, but it 
does not run. Even the water does not run, it flows. It is 
animals that run. We say the winds howl, but in fact it is 
animals that howl. And so it goes on indefinitely. None of our 
expressions are accurate ; none will bear criticism or close in- 
spection. As said before, we are always saying what we do not 
mean. We say that messages travel from one place to another. 
As a matter of fact, nothing travels in such cases. When we 
say we send a telegraph despatch to New York, we do not mean 
it. Nothing starts here and travels to New York. We simply 
have the power of developing the message in New York. So in 
talking we do not transfer our thoughts to other people. We 
merely develop their own thoughts. No light travels from 
the sun every morning. The sun merely develops light in the 
earth's atmosphere. The new wireless telegraphy demonstrates 
these facts. It is like the ringing of a bell. The bell sends out 
no sounds, no message, in any particular direction, but every one 
within a certain distance can hear it. So in wireless telegraphy. 



OUR CONFUSED IDEAS. 



135 



The power is in the air, in the earth, in the people. The reason 
why we do not need any wires, is because we are already con- 
nected with every spot on earth, as in the case of the sun. We 
simply need finer, more delicate and more powerful instruments. 

We have confused ideas on matters of identity. Can the 
same person be at two different times any more than in two dif- 
ferent places ? Are the child in infancy and the man in old age 
one and the same person? That is a grave question. What 
constitutes identity ? Can a person or thing change in any re- 
spect and remain the same individual as before ? We are ac- 
customed to use antiquated terms and we cling to obsolete ideas. 
The prevailing names of things of the present day were given to 
them hundreds and thousands of years ago, and now when we 
have different conceptions of their character, new terms should 
be applied to them. We say darkness falls, when it does not 
fall ; so we say the light breaks, when unquestionably it does 
nothing of the kind. Many things go by wrong names to-day. 
Does a thing have extent ? Does God, does virtue, does good- 
ness, does life have extent? How can a body, a thing, be at 
several different places at one and the same time ? An acre of 
ground, a square mile, the earth ; are they things, or are they 
made up of things? Have things no limits; have they any 
limits ? What are things ? Where is the thing, the house, the 
horse, the elephant, for instance? They embrace a great many 
different points and cannot be found wholly in any one of them. 
There is a mystery in all this that is not easily solved. If we 
touch the horse's ear, do we touch the animal itself ? If we 
touch a man's garment or the hair of his head, do we touch the 
man himself ? Is a man wholly concentrated in one of the hairs 
of his head, or in the hem of his garment? Again, we ask, what 
are the real boundaries of a man ? Where is it that we shall 
find him, and where shall we find him not? How can we trans- 
fer to a man what we possess, especially knowledge? Where is 
the man ? How shall we reach him ? How shall we part with 
the knowledge we have gained ? There are really no transfers 
in nature from one thing to another. Such an idea is based on a 
false philosophy. Heat is not transferred; sound is not trans- 
ferred : knowledge is not transferred. Effects are simply de- 
veloped in bodies. Things never gain what they did not possess 
before, neither do they lose. 

We are constantly hearing about things that are connected. 
How? If they were connected, they would be one. If a third 
thing — a cord, a chain, or a conjunction — connects things, it 
must separate them, for what connects things also keeps them 
apart. Again, how could things be connected ? How could two 



136 



OUR CONFUSED IDEAS. 



ever become one, and at the same time remain two ? When the 
connection is perfect, the link must disappear, and with it all 
idea of connection. 

How can we change or transf orm things ? We can replace 
and destroy things — nothing more. How can we add to or in- 
crease a thing ? When we add to a thing, the thing itself re- 
mains just what it was before. If we add five to two. does that 
make two more than it was before ? How can we add to an 
ounce to make it more than an ounce, or to a quart to make it 
more than a quart ? To increase or decrease a number would 
change its whole character and render it what it was not before. 
Take a stick two feet in length. How could we stretch it and 
make it longer than two feet ? And if we did stretch it, would 
that be adding to it in any way ? How could we shorten a stick ? 
By cutting off a piece. But that destroys the stick. No, change 
of things in any manner is impossible, and the term as we use it 
has no real meaning. Perhaps we may destroy, but we can- 
not change. 



Let us consider at length our confused ideas about numbers. 
Numbers have no fixed values of their own. Their value depends 
upon location, order or rank. Thus six may be simply six ones, 
or sixty or a six thousand, according to the order or series to 
which it belongs. 

Number, like quantity, quality, and properties of all kinds, 
is purely a matter of imagination and there is no actual, individ- 
ual existence to which it corresponds. As we have already in- 
dicated, things as individuals have no number at all, beyond one, 
which is properly not a number. If a man has only one dollar, 
he has no number of dollars. So things have no extent. A 
thing that extends must cover two or more points at one time, 
that is, be in two places at one time. If a bridge extends from 
A to B, where is it really located ? In neither place, nowhere. 
In fact a bridge does not extend or stretch itself any more than 
other objects do. No body properly speaking extends or has 
extent. 

So it is impossible for things to have quantity. Can there be 
more or less of a thing, or part of a thing ? A thing that is less 
than the whole thing is no thing at all— it is nothing. A dollar 
which is one cent short is not a dollar, it is nothing. It is not 
even ninety-nine cents, for there are no cents in a dollar. We 
sometimes say a hundred cents make, or are equivalent to, a dol- 
lar, but that is not strictly true. No, the fact is things are mere 
points, they have neither extent nor quantity. The moment we 



OUR CONFUSED IDEAS. 



137 



get extent or quantity, we get things that are made of pieces or 
parts, and nature affords nothing of the kind. Neither do things 
exist at different times ; for a body to be at two different times is 
the same as its being in two different places, which is impossible. 
When a body is at A it cannot be at B ; when it is in the year 
five it cannot be in the year twenty. 

Things cannot properly be considered as having qualities or 
properties. Properties are what we assign to things — things 
have no properties otherwise. We conceive of qualities only by 
comparing things. Everything in quality is, the same as in the 
case of numbers, a matter of relative value. We say a man is 
tall, comparing him with men who are short ; we say marble is 
cold, comparing it with other objects not so cold. Things have 
no qualities save those which men assign to them. Where there 
is no comparison, qualities are not to be thought of. We speak 
of qualities, but they are only things to be talked about. Where 
are the qualities ? A man may have a shirt or a hat, and this 
may be taken from him and he would still survive. But if we 
take the tallness from a tall man, what becomes of him — or the 
coldness from marble, or the sweetness from sugar? 

Again, comparison is never justifiable. We can only com- 
pare things that are alike, that belong to the same class, that are 
characterized by no differences, that are identical. But there 
are no such things in the world. All things are unique, and 
therefore they cannot be grouped or classified, without ignoring 
radical differences. We compare men with men, assuming that 
they are alike ; but not men with trees or animals, which are 
different. We may say a tree is taller than a man, but that is 
merely comparing length in one case with the length in an- 
other case. We cannot count things that are unlike. We can 
have five wagons and ten horses, but we cannot group them and 
get fifteen of anything. So with our adjectives. They belong 
only to things of the same class. We say this man and that man, 
or black men and white men, not this man and that book, or a 
white man and a black dog. They cannot be grouped or com- 
pared, they cannot be brought together. 

These positions are highly metaphysical in character, but 
they are nevertheless very important, as we shall find when we 
come to consider the questions of everyday life. Our remarks 
thus far must indicate how inaccurate we are in the language we 
use in writing or speaking. Our ideas are not founded in truth 
to begin with. We proceed constantly upon the assumption that 
things can be changed and still remain what they were before 
— that,. they can be increased, diminished, extended, contracted, 
multiplied, divided, and the like, which is actually impossible. 



138 



OUR CONFUSED IDEAS. 



Fractions are parts only in a certain sense — they are never 
actual existences, but merely products of the imagination. In 
all the realms of nature, there are no parts of things, save as 
they are found in the minds of men. Some things are relatively 
smaller than others, but they are not therefore parts of other 
things. No matter how diminutive or insignificant things may 
be, they are always complete and distinct in their individuality. A 
fly is as perfect and as wonderfully made as an elephant. 

One-third has the same relation to one that a unit has to 
three. The ratio, the relative size, is one-third, or as one to 
three, but one-third is counted in one direction, while three has 
its location in the opposite direction. The relation of these ex- 
tremes, one-third and three, is indicated by nine or one-ninth. 
In decimals, the tens count to the left from the point, and tenths 
count towards the right. Between tens and tenths, the relation 
is indicated by one hundred, the square of ten. 

What we have said of thirds and tenths applies to all frac- 
tions. All fractions are whole numbers of a different series, or 
location ; and they are always of a smaller size or less value than 
what is called a whole number. So all numbers are properly 
fractions, because they are relatively smaller than some other 
number. Thus, two is one-third of six, and five is one-fourth of 
twenty. A peck, a quarter, is a whole thing quite as much as a 
bushel is — so an inch is one-twelfth of a foot, and an ounce is 
one-sixteenth of a pound. But it is not true that there are four 
pecks in a bushel, any more than there are four quarter dollars 
in a whole dollar. Pecks and bushels, and quarters and dollars, 
are as distinct from each other as any two things could possibly 
be, and neither one is the measure or part of the other. It is not 
true that numbers or things have two halves, or four quarters, or 
eight eighths. The half of eight is one number, four, not two 
fours : the eighth of sixteen is two, not eight twos. No number 
is made up of two halves or four fourths ; it is not made up of 
parts, it has no parts, except in the imagination of men. Four 
quarters of a dollar would never make a dollar ; nor would a 
dollar make four quarters. Our silver quarter is a typical frac- 
tion — it is a dollar of one-fourth the usual size. These are things 
that have no connection whatever, and by no possible process 
could one be transformed into the other. As soon as a thing is 
broken into fragments or fractions, no matter how regular or 
exact they may be, the thing itself ceases to exist. Nor could 
the parts be again united to make a whole. 

It must be remembered that no number applies to more than 
one thing. Groups are themselves single things ; ten or £ hun- 
dred is singular quite as much as one is. Suppose we have ten 



OUR CONFUSED IDEAS. 



139 



books lying before us. Does the number ten apply to any one 
of them, or to any five or eight of them ? It only applies to the 
group as a whole. Numbers are a very late development. 
Savages have no such idea of numbers as we have. Like 
children, many cannot count, and of those who can, many can- 
not go beyond the most elementary numbers. Things, as we 
have already indicated, do not have numbers. The idea is con- 
fined solely to our mind. The original idea was not four, or ten, 
but the fourth or tenth thing — a thing may be the fourth or 
tenth in order of location or appearance, but there are no things 
to which 44 four" or "ten" can properly apply. Our figures 
were letters in their origin. The Hebrews used letters, and they 
had no figures. "A" indicated one, because it was first in the 
alphabet; "C" indicated three, because it was the third letter, 
and so on. The Greeks followed the same system. Our Arabic 
or Hindoo figures were not in use till about the eleventh cen- 
tury. Even the Romans used letters. A single stroke, 1, was 
one, two strokes, two, three strokes, three, precisely as we hold 
up three fingers to indicate three. Thus, three is only so many 
ones repeated. The Greeks used b for two, and b marked for 
one-half, and the same with other letters. They evidently ap- 
preciated the fact that, so far as number is concerned, there is no 
essential difference between three and one-third. 

Mathematics has developed into a great science, but there is 
nothing in nature to correspond with any of its results or any of 
its operations. There are no numbers of things, as we have 
already seen , and no fractions or fragments of things. There is 
no such operation in nature as adding things, or subtracting, 
multiplying or dividing things, no increasing, diminishing, or 
changing things in any manner — no products, no transformation. 
Mathematics starts with a fiction, an assumption, or rather 
with several fictions or several assumptions, and then it proceeds 
boldly as if there could be no possible question about the 
premises. Most of the arithmetical propositions are not founded 
in fact. If one cow is worth twenty-five dollars, what would 
two be worth ? Indeed, who knows ? Because one cow is sold 
for ten dollars, it does not follow that two would be sold for 
twenty dollars. There is no connection between the propositions. 
There is no relation. If one man can do a certain amount of 
work, how much can ten men do ? How shall we know? It all 
depends upon the men and the circumstances of the case — their 
industry, their ability, the weather, etc. There are no duplicates 
in nature, and so the whole basis of arithmetical calculation falls 
to the ground. 

The foundations of geometry, it may be added, are just as 



140 



OUR CONFUSED IDEAS. 



unstable as those of arithmetic and algebra. In all the demon- 
strations peculiar to this science, the reasoning applied is based 
upon unsound premises. Geometry deals exclusively with lines 
and surfaces that are imaginary, and with forms and figures 
which nowhere exist. They are not found at least in practical 
life. There are wheels in practice, but there are no circles. 
There are no globes that correspond with theory. The world is 
not a globe — far from it. Triangles and squares, and polygons 
and ellipses, and even radii and perimeters, are things to write 
and talk about, but when they come to be grasped and handled, 
they vanish, like Creusa's ghost, into thin air. They cannot 
endure close inspection. The figures of geometry do not grow in 
the woods and fields ; they are found only in the minds of men. 
It is the shell, the shadow of things, that geometry treats of — 
not the substance. Geometry may teach the learner how to 
reason, but not always how to reason correctly nor to be sure of 
reaching sound conclusions in any case. 

The axioms on which the whole fabric of demonstration is 
based are usually either tautological or untrue. To say that 
parallels will not meet, no matter how far they may be pro- 
duced, is to say that parallels are parallel ; that the whole is 
greater than any of its parts, is the same as saying "greater 
than what is less ; " that the whole is equal to the sum of its 
parts, is false, since a whole in parts is different from a whole as 
a whole. "The halves of things," we are told, "are always 
equal." This may be the case in theory but not in practice. 
There are no halves of things, certainly no exact halves, in prac- 
tice. Where are the halves of a horse, a tree, a stone, a wagon, 
a mowing machine, a steam engine, a book, a town? How could 
two halves be exactly equal in any case ? It is said a straight 
line proceeds to a certain point, but it never does. There are no 
straight or other lines to be found, and they never proceed. The 
line we draw with a pen or pencil is not a line, but merely a 
representative of a line. All the figures produced in geometry 
are pure images, precisely like those found in heathen mythology. 
They cannot be handled, they cannot be applied to each other, 
they cannot be measured. They cannot be added, substracted, 
multiplied or divided. Geometry deals with space, and space is 
a shadow, a dream. 



CHAPTER XII 



IDENTITY AND INDIVIDUALITY. 

What constitutes an individual? Where is the line of de- 
markation between this thing and that thing ? And back of all 
this, what is a thing ? Has it any limits ? Is what we call the 
outer form, or the outer shell, of things, the true limit of things? 
The form in which things appear to us is merely an illusion. It 
is evanescent. It exists only for an instant ; every object in 
nature, like the clouds, is changing its form continually. Some 
things, like the hills, change slowly, but we know that even they 
are changing constantly. There is no such thing as rest in this 
world ; it is the end of motion, it is one of the conditions of mo- 
tion. Bodies are simply the material of which things are com- 
posed. But material has no limits ; it belongs to the universe. 

It is very difficult indeed to draw any proper line of distinc- 
tion between any two objects which we regard as separate and 
distinct individuals. There is really no proper line in such cases. 
We cannot, for instance, distinguish between the past and the 
future. They are separated by an inappreciable moment of time, 
the present. The present exists but for one moment ; in an in- 
stant it is a thing of the past and its place is taken by what be- 
fore was the future. Continuity is never destroyed. The plow 
of five thousand years ago is merely the antiquated or original 
form of what is known as the plow of to-day. We add to things, 
we modify them — but we never transform or annihilate them. 
A plow always remains a plow, no matter how many stages it 
may have passed through, nor for how long a period it may have 
been known. The people of Britain, passing through all the 
changes and vicissitudes of two thousand years, still remain the 
people of Britain. No matter how many importations or deporta- 
tions there may have been, while passing from a state of barbar- 



142 



IDENTITY AND INDIVIDUALITY. 



ism to civilized life, the people continue to be Britons still. A 
book is called a book, even while in its original form of a roll. 
So we call a book a volume, which means a roll, from the Latin 
volvo, to turn or roll. It will be perceived that the name and idea 
do not change, no matter how often or to what extent the form 
changes. A gun is a gun to-day, though it is not at all like the 
gun of the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries. Take the words 
coat, hat, hose, or even the words temple, house, or other words 
for illustration. A house was a mere hut originally, with a 
single room ; now it is a palace with many rooms and a great 
array of furniture, but still it remains a house. So we speak of 
a tree, through all its various stages of existence and with all its 
transformations, from the feeble shrub to the sturdy oak, simply 
as a tree. We call the small mountain stream a river ; and after 
it has increased to ten times its volume, and it has received the 
waters of a dozen other important streams, we call it a river 
still — and to our minds it is the very identical stream that we 
noticed in the mountains ! 

To speak intelligently, there are no single things. All the 
things of which we have knowledge are made up of other things, 
or of parts of things. They are groups or compounds. Things 
have extent, and if they have extent, they must have points and 
parts. To the mind of man every unit has fractions, and these 
may be carried to infinity. The tree has leaves and branches 
and bark and roots ; so the human body is composed of organs, 
each working independently, and yet in concert with all the 
others. The heart, the liver, the lungs, the kidneys, even the 
hairs of the head are separate individualities, like the leaves and 
branches of trees, and they all have offices which are peculiarly 
their own. As the cord is made of threads and the threads of 
fibers, so everything is made up of subordinate individualities, 
and so we shall find the case to be wherever we go. There are 
no units ; or rather, units always consist of groups. When we 
regard a thing as a unit, we simply overlook its parts. 

Every individual is an organization in which coordination 
and subordination prevails, precisely as we find in government, 
or as in eveiy case where we have organization. The human 
body is as good an illustration as we shall find of an individual 
thing, and that we know is highly organized. Without organiza- 
tion, and without coordination and subordination implied, no- 
body could for a moment exist. Every body must have a head, 
or something which takes the place of a head, a directing center, 
precisely as in the case of the human body. Life itself affords 
an instance of organization ; and life cannot exist without or- 
ganization. If things exist, they must have parts ; and if they 



IDENTITY AND INDIVIDUALITY. 



143 



have parts, some of them must be subordinate, for it is not 
possible that all parts shall have the same place and the same 
office. 

We usually date our existence from the day that we were 
born, from the date when the shell was broken, and the chick 
first emerged from its place of concealment. But clearly enough 
the chick must have existed long before that. The breaking of 
the shell, the being born, was only a simple and unimportant 
step in the process. The child, the offspring, is being born really 
weeks and months before it finally is born. Being born, as we 
call it, is only an ordinary and natural step or stage in the off- 
spring's development. It consumed food and grew just as well 
before birth as after, and just as much after birth as before. 
As a being, it was as fully and completely organized at one time 
as another. There never was or is a time when any being was or 
is not a being, a complete being, though some organs at first may 
be rudimentary. 

Let us not forget that the same man is being born and dies 
as a matter of fact every moment. Dying and being born are 
processes that never begin, never end. No one can conceive of a 
time or make any estimate as to the period when the offspring 
began to be, began to assimilate, began to grow. To grow is to 
be born ; the more we assimilate from the world in which we 
find ourselves, the more we become something different from 
what we were before. Animals change their nature according 
to what they eat. A man's character is affected by what he 
consumes. Every being resembles in some respects the things 
that constitute his daily food. 

As we have seen, the existence in the shell was only one 
stage, one form of our existence. There must have been other 
stages, other forms, at some earlier period. But those stages of 
which we know nothing can have no concern for us, and we 
have no more to do with our existence after death than with our 
existence before birth. What interest could we have in stages 
over which we have no control? The past and the future are as 
nothing to us. They are both outside of our realm ; they belong 
to another world. It is idle to bother with mere fancies and 
fictions, when there are so many important things that may be 
called the realities of life. 

There are two kinds of existence, the conscious and the un- 
conscious — one beginning a while after birth and the other a 
while before death. But whether it be one or the other, our 
existence goes on forever and forever. It has always gone on ; 
as we have before said, there is no beginning nor end to either 
birth or death. There is not an individual in existence to-day 



p 



144 



IDENTITY AND INDIVIDUALITY. 



who was nor in the world even before creation dawned. Crea- 
tion itself was only a birth, a forming and presenting of what al- 
ready existed, Creation out of nothing it is not possible for 
any one to comprehend. Alan has never known anything of the 
kind. Every being is infinite in time and space. Beings have- 
no limits. They embrace everything, they are everything. 
They are coexistent and coextensive with the universe. Christ 
was in the world, and the world was in him. But not Christ 
alone. The same is true of all beings, all things. 

Consciousness is by no means essential to existence. Most 
of the existence with which we are acquainted is unconscious 
existence. In fact our own conscious existence is but a moment 
compared with that part which is unconscious. All matter is 
unconscious. Only a small portion of the world presents forms 
even of life. 

Growth is reproduction, and this goes on all through life.. 
When this process ceases, the individual dies. Production and 
reproduction are one and the same thing. We could not have 
birth without death, nor death without birth. They are remote 
ends of the same process. Without birth no one would die. 

What is the conception or begetting of a new being ? It is 
certainly not a creation, but a development by fertilization of the 
maternal germ. There is no creation to be found in nature. A 
grain may lie dormant for an age. and an egg for years, and 
then, under favorable conditions,, begin life anew and proceed 
with its arrested development. This is what we call birth. It 
is properly a process in which the being is completing its career 
and hastening on to decay and death once more. 

The process of birth and growth is curious, and most of it is 
concealed from our view. But things are strange to us and 
mysterious only because we are ignorant. Is the grain a mere 
continuance of the plant from which it was developed? The 
foetus has a little food stored up in the beginiring for its support : 
after a while it grows by assimilating and appropriating from 
the world around. The plant feeds as the animal feeds, select- 
ing what it wants and rejecting what it finds distasteful. Is 
this not will, calculation, reasoning ? 

Again, what is death? Surely it is nothing strange, nothing 
anomalous. We are dying every day, every moment. We are 
continually casting from our bodies waste or effete matter, 
secretions, and excretions of all kinds — all which at one time 
were essential parts of our system. Our hair and teeth drop out : 
scales peel off from our skin and we are changing constantly. 
What becomes of us finally ? All there is of us is the matter of 
which we are composed and this is changing continually. We 



IDENTITY AND INDIVIDUALITY. 



145 



repeat, what becomes of us finally? Amid all these transforma- 
tions always going on, do we still remain the same person? .We 
are continually taking from the world and giving back — we are 
being born and dying. When we die at last, we simply restore 
all that we possess. That, and that alone, is death. We merely 
loosen our grip on what never belonged to us. There is nothing 
at all anomalous in this proceeding. Dying and being born are 
two extremes — and they are not so very far apart either. To be 
born is to appropriate, assimilate ; to die is to return our accu- 
mulation to the great reservoir from which it was originally 
taken. All our life we are appropriating, accumulating. 

Are the living changed into the dead, or are the dead and 
the living different beings ? Is the bud converted into a leaf or 
flower ? Or was the bud nothing but a leaf in the beginning ? 
Certain it is, when the leaf comes, the bud disappears. It is not 
the living but the dead who are dead, as it is only the good who 
are good. What is transformation? A figment of the brain — 
nothing more. What we consider real is only apparent. Trans- 
formation is simply what we think, imagine. Is a sane man 
transformed into an insane man ? While the man was sane, he 
was not insane, and when he is insane, he is not sane. To be 
sane and to be insane are two different states for two very differ- 
ent beings. What two beings ever could be more different than 
a man in his sane and a man in his insane moments ? Whether 
the sane and the insane man were the same person or not, makes 
no difference. The case is precisely the same as if they were not 
the same man. 

What is death? Look at the tree and see how that dies — 
part at a time, a branch here, the leaves there, and finally the 
trunk and the roots decay. So man dies. An organ may be 
wholly or partially destroyed, and still life in the being may con- 
tinue. Death is decay, and decay is death — nothing more. 

Is the Roman Empire dead? No, it is merely replaced. 
Europe is filled with Roman empires in miniature at the present 
moment — all governed by Roman laws, and Roman justice, and 
all following those Roman methods of government which were 
adopted and applied by Roman rulers two thousand years ago. 
The Roman religion also prevails, in a form more or less modi- 
fied, with Roman temples, Roman dress, Roman art and architec- 
ture to be seen on all sides. How can we say that Rome is dead ? 
No, it has only assumed a new form and it continues to exist 
under new conditions ; it lives and thrives and has its influence 
over the civilized world as it had in the days of yore. Rome is 
not dead — nothing really dies that continues to have an influ- 
ence. Nay, Greece is not dead ; neither is Egypt dead, nor Asia 



146 



IDENTITY AND INDIVIDUALITY. 



Minor, with its scattered mounds and ruined cities. They all 
live and have their accustomed influence upon our every day 
life. Rome gave us laws to rule us, while men had only gods 
before. Since Rome came and conquered, it is law, not God, or 
gods, that rule the world. Men worship the laws now as men 
worshiped gods formerly. Indeed, there are no gods at present. 

What was the Reformation ? We can never know what the 
Reformation was ; and in fact it is a matter of no concern to us 
to know what the Reformation was, or what anything else was. 
The question for us to consider, is rather what the Reformation 
is? The Reformation has never ended. Nothing ever dies, or if 
it does, it dies when it is born. For during every moment of its 
existence it changes, and whatever changes dies. But we have 
the Reformation with us still — or rather we have the result of 
the Reformation still. We can never separate things from their 
results. Results are really new forms of old things. The tree of 
to-day is the result of the shrub of fifty years ago ; the man is 
the result of growth in the boy of the past. Is the boy dead ? 
He certainly has disappeared — the boy as a boy is no more. But 
just as the boy is the man and the man is the boy, so is the Re- 
formation of the sixteenth century the same as the Reformation 
of the nineteenth 01 twentieth. 

Does anybody die ? Does anything die ? Is there any limit, 
any bounds, any beginning or end of any being, or of any created 
thing ? When did the Reformation begin ; when did it end ? 
Did it ever end? Does anything end? The Reformation cer- 
tainly did not begin w T ith Luther, nor did it end with Luther ; 
neither did Christianity begin with Christ nor end with Christ. 
Luther was only one factor, perhaps an important factor, in the 
movement. So it was with Christ. Paul no doubt did more to 
advance Christianity, more to shape its course and give it a start 
in the world than Christ himself did. 

The Reformation was a national movement, a race move- 
ment, a movement of the age. Luther was only an instrument ; 
he was one instrument, as Christ and Peter and Paul and the 
Popes have been other instruments. The Reformation was not 
solely, nor even principally, religious in character. It was polit- 
ical rather than religious. It was a rebellion, a bold dash for 
freedom on the part of the German race. The Pope had become 
an autocrat ; he not only represented God, he was God, so far as % 
the affairs of this world are concerned. He was infallible, as 
gods always are. This is the idea that the Germans rose to com- 
bat, and it is the same idea, the same claim, the same dogma, 
that mankind are combatting at this day. The Germans con- 



IDENTITY AND INDIVIDUALITY. 



147 



tended not alone for liberty of action, but for liberty of thought 
and the right of free inquiry and their own belief. 

Of course the reformers builded larger than they intended — 
that often happens. They thought only to correct a few evils in 
the church. They did not perceive for a moment that they 
would destroy the church or seriously endanger the church. 
They were going to reform and improve the church, forgetting, 
or not appreciating the fact, that reformation and improvement 
always result in the destruction of the old. We repeat, every 
change results in the destruction of the old and the birth of the 
new. Without change there would be no birth, and with birth 
there is always a change. The old and the new are in some 
mysterious way connected and continuous, but still they are 
vastly different. The one is dead while the other is living. 

So little did Luther contemplate what he was doing, or was 
about to do, he was actually astounded at the results produced 
by the Reformation in his day. He found, to his surprise, that 
he made things worse instead of better than they were. He said 
himself, complainingly, "the world is becoming worse." That 
is the result of revolution always. As we have already inti- 
mated, revolution, like reformation, destroys the old. 



CHAPTER XIII. 

THE INSTABILITY OF VALUES. 

As we have more than once intimated, our ideas and con- 
ceptions of things are wholly the product of our brain, or rather 
they are the reflections of our natures. If we ourselves were 
different in temperament and constitution, we should have dif- 
ferent ideas and conceptions from those which we now possess. 
Our thoughts and notions make us what we are ; or, more accur- 
ately, what we are gives character to our thoughts and concep- 
tions. 

What we have just been observing applies particularly in 
the case of the value of things. We speak of value as if it were 
something definable or ascertainable. But such a case of value 
does not exist, and it never has existed. Value is like character, 
a very changeable and indefinite thing. Character never re- 
mains a stable or unvarying quantity for a single moment, and 



148 



THE INSTABILITY OF VALUES. 



so it is with value. Both value and character are things for us 
exclusively, and never for other people. They are merely what 
we think, and they are never, for us, what some one else thinks. 
Things for us are worth merely what we think they are worth, 
and that depends upon how much we want them and what we 
are willing to give for them. If we have no use or desire for 
them, they have no interest for us, and therefore they are value- 
less. It will be noticed that the value of things depends not 
upon something intrinsic or peculiar to the things themselves, 
but upon our own circumstances, our tastes, our wants — wholly 
upon us. If a thing had any value of its own, a pound of silver 
to-day would be worth as much as a pound of silver ten years 
ago, and the same in South Africa as in South America. But 
such is not the case. The values of things depend not upon what 
they are, but upon what people think, upon what they will give 
for them, or upon supply and demand. What is valuable to-day 
will be worthless perhaps a year hence, under a different state of 
circumstances. So, really, if we come down to the truth of the 
matter, one thing has as much value as another, which is no 
value at all. A penny of a certain date may be worth fifty 
dollars, if some fool can be found who will give that sum. So 
a chip from the coffin of some celebrated person may be worth 
more than a whole cord of ordinary wood. 

It is time that people came to have sensible ideas of the value 
of things, and hence to speak more intelligently on that subject 
in future. The value of things depends entirely upon what any 
one will give for them ; and before anything can be sold, a pur- 
chaser must be found. The state of his mind, his feelings, his 
wishes, settles the whole business in all cases. When we ask 
what a thing is worth, we mean what will some one give for it. 
The question is often asked, how much is such a man worth, 
that is, what price do you put upon the property he owns? But 
that is always a very unsafe question to answer. What a man is 
worth, is what his property will sell for on short notice. And 
who shall undertake to say what that is in advance ? Yet, many 
estimate the worth of their estates by what they paid for the 
property originally, which is not a fair standard at all. If you 
can change people's thoughts you can change values — and in no 
other way. 

If the time ever comes when people can get just and proper 
notions of value, their footing will be more stable and things 
with them will go on better all around. 



CHAPTER XIV. 



MOTIVES AND PURPOSES. 

We hear so much said about the aims and ends of nature, 
about the plans and purposes of God — what God thinks, what he 
says, what he promises and what he aims to do ! Also about 
man's mission, and about his particular purpose in life ! What 
rank nonsense, and how gratuitous are all such statements and 
assumptions as these ! And how do we know that nature has 
any aims, that nature thinks, wishes or designs? How do we 
know that God has any plans, or wishes or purposes? How do 
we know that there is a God to begin with? If God is really 
God, as we assume he is, he need not have any designs, plans, 
wishes or purposes. It is men only that bother with these things. 
God need not think ; he need not wish. It is men and animals 
that must think and hope and plan. Imperfect, finite beings 
think, wish, plan, labor. But God, if he is God, never thinks 
or labors. The story that God labored at one time for six succes- 
sive days, is a myth, a pure fabrication, too impossible for any 
sensible being to believe for a moment. Animals and men have 
schemes and plans, and they employ thought and reflection, be- 
cause they are weak and imperfect. But God has no need to 
plan ; certainly he does not need to labor. He does not even 
need to wish. Gods are like kings ; instead of wishing, they 
command, and all things come to them. That is one of the ad- 
vantages of omnipotence, it is one of its prerogatives. 

Motive and reason are one and the same thing. Most of 
what we call motive is the result of reasoning and calculation. 
But really very little that is done by men is the result of reason 
or is done with any special object in view. What moves men 
usually is desire, appetite, impulse. There is generally little 
reason in connection with human action, and hence there is 



150 



MOTIVES AND PURPOSES. 



very little of what might be called true motive in any case. 
Motive is merely a form of cause. But as there is no real cause 
in the affairs of this world, so there is no real motive for human 
action. God does not plan, reflect, reason, and so he has no 
motive. One who is infinite in wisdom and power never has any 
need to reflect, and he can have no designs. He has no occasion 
to choose. He decides, resolves, without reflection. A man 
reflects, considers, decides simply because to him the future is 
unknown and uncertain. With God who is omniscient and 
omnipotent the case is different. To him everything is known 
and everything is possible. He never hesitates, because he is 
never in doubt. He simply does what he resolves to do. 

Motive implies a plan, a scheme. Those alone have motives 
who reason, consider, reflect. Animals have no true motives. 
They think, but they do not reason. They have desire ; it is 
their desires, their wants, their appetites, that impel them to the 
course which they finally decide to pursue. Men have schemes, 
plans, motives, but usually they act from desire, and motive, 
with results in view, is entirely lost sight of. If a man eats, he 
has no motive — he is simply hungry. So if he fears, or flies, he 
does so from impulse and not from motive. If a man walks, 
there is no more motive than when he breathes. And so when 
he sings or talks. He is merely moved to act as he does, but he 
does not reflect, and hence it is not properly a matter of motive. 
So in playing the violin there is no motive. Often a man kills 
another wholly from impulse, and motive is entirely absent. A 
man loves or hates without motive. In not one case out of one 
thousand is there motive for human action. 



CHAPTER XV. 



PREVENTION AND IMPROVEMENT. 



If we wish to have any influence in human affairs, and es- 
pecially in guiding men and shaping their characters, we must 
begin with them early in life. It is the twig that may be bent, 
not the full grown tree ; it is the child that can be changed in 
character and direction, not the mature man. To prevent dis- 
ease is comparatively easy ; but to cure disease without allow- 
ing it to run its course, after it has once become fully established 
in the system, is next thing to an impossibility. This is particu- 
larly true in the case of government. The acquiring of power by 
designing and unscrupulous men is a slow process ; the loss of 
liberty by the people is always gradual and the operation is al- 
most imperceptible. The people are not quick to perceive 
things before they come to pass ; they are extremely slow in de- 
tecting the designs of those who make it a business to undermine 
free institutions. As we have already intimated, people are too 
confiding, too apathetic, and too heedless altogether. They 
might easily check ambitious men in their career of usurpation, 
if they would only start in time but, as a matter of fact, they 
wait till crystallization sets in and then it is quite too late. 
After the enemy is actually installed in the citadel, it is usually 
too late to resist. In other words, it is the wrong time to begin. 
The time to make the main resistance is before the enemy breaks 
through the outer lines. What the people as a body want at all 
times, and what individuals also need in their affairs, is judg- 
ment and eternal vigilance. But as bodies of men never have a 
head, they have no mind, they have no one to look after them 
or care for them. So, why should they not fall an easy prey to 
demagogues and artful men ? They uniformly do so in the end — 
it is simply a question of time as to the fate of any mere body of 
men. It is only for a comparatively short time that such a head- 



152 



PREVENTION AND IMPROVEMENT. 



less, mindless body of men as "the people" can retain their 
liberties. 

No, it cannot be too well borne in mind, that very much de- 
pends upon how a man starts in early life. When he has gone 
on in a certain direction for some time, it is very hard for him to 
turn back and take a new direction, even when he knows and 
confesses that he is wrong. A little mountain stream can easily 
be turned into a new channel, but a great river overcomes all 
obstacles and it must be allowed to pursue its course unchecked 
to the last. 

How shall we have improvement in this world, especially in 
the human heart ? How shall we change things ? How shall 
we improve men? We can hardly change or improve either 
men or things — it is next thing to impossible. We can divert 
men into new paths, we can interest them in new subjects, but 
we cannot change a man's nature, his spots — not at least without 
regeneration and really putting a new man in his place. 

It is clear enough that education does not reform or renew 
men ; indeed, it has very little effect upon character, except 
when the efforts are properly directed and persisted in while the 
learner is young. Religion did have for a time an influence upon 
character, but that was when men were as children, when they 
relied entirely upon the priests for knowledge and direction, and 
when they did not pretend to do any thinking on their own ac- 
count. But now the case is different and every one is able to do 
his own thinking, without any assistance from other sources. 
No, religion is having hardly any appreciable influence upon hu- 
man conduct at the present moment. 

It cannot be that we must look to civilization as a source of 
reforming power, for civilization is greatly in need of reform in 
its own household. It cannot be the press to which we must 
look for assistance in this emergency. Reformation of this 
character does not come within the domain of the press, whose 
chief mission, it is assumed, is to disseminate information and 
coin money. 

We wish we knew some means or method by which the 
hearts of men could be moved. There was a time when elo- 
quence had some power, but now even eloquence, as an instru- 
ment with which to move and impress men, has fallen into dis- 
use. People in this age will read, if the subject interests them, 
but they will not listen. Even in Congress, the best speeches are 
uniformly delivered to empty seats. They are delivered to be 
printed, not to be listened to. except in very rare instances. 
When people listen nowadays they want to be amused, not in- 
structed. 



PREVENTION AND IMPROVEMENT. 



153 



If we could only arouse men ! But how shall it be done ? 
Teaching will not do, lectures will not do, books will not do, 
prayers will not do. Even an alarm of fire in the night time 
would not stir most men. They would wake up just long enough 
to ascertain that their property was not in danger, and then they 
would sink back and soon be in a sound slumber again. We see 
thousands and thousands daily traveling the road that leads to 
certain death and destruction, and we would like to do some- 
thing to save them. But our advice and admonitions would 
usually be of no avail — no one would give heed to them. In this 
pleasure-loving and commercial age of ours, people will only 
read what interests them — a continued story, for instance, or the 
record of some scandal or crime. So, all we have to do is to sit 
still and see the procession pass by. 

It is curious to observe in this connection how careless and 
indifferent people are ! Careless in what they say, careless as 
to what they do, and utterly indifferent as to consequences in 
most cases. Everything goes mainly at random. Nothing is 
scanned or scrutinized closely, and nothing is ever reported with 
anything like accuracy and fairness. An approximation to truth 
is the most that can be expected in any case. People do not 
worry about truth ; they do not even know what it is when they 
come across it. 

But would it not be well for people to be a little more pre- 
cise and considerate, especially in cases where there is much at 
stake ? Carelessness, listlessness, indolence and indifference are 
the besetting sins of the present age. It is one of the most strik- 
ing features of civilized life. We are reminded of a lot of opium 
eaters, or of so many somnambulists wandering about aimlessly 
in their sleep. No one can predict when they will awake nor 
decide just what they may do before they awake. The whole 
business is a most distressing uncertainty. 



CHAPTER XVI. 



NEW VIEWS OF EDUCATION. 

Nothing deserves so much attention and such mature con- 
sideration as the subject of education. It is far better to have a 
little education that is true than to have a great accumulation of 
theories and notions that must be unlearned to prevent their be- 
coming a burden in after life. What is our education for ? Is it 
to enable people to do their work better and to lead a better life ? 
No, that is not the chief object of education according to the pre- 
vailing theory at the present time. The object is to make good 
children in the family, good members in the church and good 
citizens in the state. That is the chief aim and object of educa- 
tion according to the theory on which it is now based. Educa- 
tion is strictly a family matter, a church and state matter, and 
since it is for the benefit of these organizations mainly, it is 
maintained at public expense. Pupils are taught what is con- 
tained in the books, not what is known to be truth. Everything 
goes by authority, in schools. 

But education really ought to be an individual matter. It 
ought to be for the advancement and the future welfare of the 
learner, rather than for either the family, the church or the 
state. Pupils should not have too much education to begin with. 
It should be merely a platform on which pupils may stand until 
they are strong enough to help themselves. As matters exist in 
the department of education at the present time, we go too far in 
some directions and not far enough in other directions. We do 
not possess clear and well-defined notions as yet as to what can 
and what cannot be accomplished through the medium of educa- 
tion. In too many cases, teachers do not comprehend clearly 
the true character of education in the first place. Many have an 
impression that education can transform a person with one 
character into a person with a character that is entirely differ- 
ent. But this is an absolute impossibility. Education cannot 



NEW VIEWS OF EDUCATION. 



155 



even confer talents upon people who do not possess ability. 
Education is an active, not a passive process ; no person can 
learn without making some effort. It is impossible to teach a 
tree or an inanimate being, for the reason that neither is capa- 
able of making any effort. 

What is education, then, what does it do ? It renders as- 
sistance ; it helps those that help themselves, and it helps no 
others. Education, so far as the learner is concerned, is purely 
a matter of growth. The learner grows in knowledge just as the 
plant grows, from the soil where it is placed, through the in- 
fluences by which it is affected. Knowledge cannot be trans- 
ferred ; it never has been transferred from one to another at any 
time or in any manner. The germs of all knowledge are within 
— never without. Every man knows to-day as much as he ever 
will know, only the time may come when he will better under- 
stand and comprehend what he knows. People who know noth- 
ing never can learn, and therefore it is vain to attempt to teach 
such creatures to any extent. All progress in knowledge is mere 
development. We never can know what other people know ; we 
never can think what they think nor understand what they un- 
derstand. The very best we can do towards advancing in that 
direction is to get well in hand what we do know, what we al- 
ways have known. 

The main effort of the teacher should not be to instill 
into the mind of the pupil an indefinite number of doctrines and 
dogmas, which may be or may not be true, but to start him on 
the path that leads to knowledge and urge him to proceed 
steadily and carefully in his inquiry after truth. We should not 
teach the pupil for a moment what we consider to be truth, but 
let him ascertain for himself what is truth. In other words, the 
main effort of educators should be to induce the pupil to ascer- 
tain for himself what is truth, and finally to express his thoughts 
in clear and intelligible language. This is the beginning and the 
end of learning. This is the gaining of wisdom. 

According to the plans and systems that prevail to-day, 
pupils are spending far too much time in getting what is called 
an education, and they are taught too many things that can be 
of no use to them in after life. In fact, most of what the pupil 
learns in school has to be discarded as he grows older and 
makes progress in real knowledge. What is wanted in this life 
is useful and practical knowledge, instead of theoretical and 
speculative knowledge. There are too many fads in our schools. 
Moreover, the pupil takes up his studies altogether too early in 
life, and he continues in them for too many years. The best 
way to learn how to do things is to go where they are done. 



156 



NEW VIEWS OF EDUCATION. 



Practical education is far more serviceable than theories of any- 
kind. 

And then how silly it is to talk about finishing an education ! 
As if an education ever could be finished ! Boys and girls go to 
school a while at one institution and a while at another which is 
higher. About the age of twenty or twenty-one, they finish 
their education ! But that is really when their education ought 
to begin. If a man lived to be two hundred years old — a sensible 
man, we mean — he would then just begin to appreciate how 
little there was that he could be said to know. He would realize 
then, much more than ever before, how very little knowledge it 
is that any man can be said to have acquired. If people would 
study more than they do and spend less time in accumulating 
property that they cannot use, they would be happier and wiser 
than they are. 

We are too anxious to do something for others, to help them, 
to teach them, to direct them — and while we are doing that, we 
very often neglect our own salvation. It is very little indeed 
that we can do for others in the way of intellectual and moral 
advancement. Learning, we repeat, is not a passive but an ac- 
tive process ; people really cannot be taught, but they can learn, 
with the help of others, if they will only make the required 
effort. People never become good through what others do for 
them. Regeneration must always come from within. And yet 
people are perpetually trying to do something for others by way 
of education. They imagine that they have just the medicine, 
the panacea, that will cure everybody, if people will only take 
the remedy they prescribe. This world is full of goody-goody 
people who are anxious to be doing something nice for other 
folks, and especially for the children of other people. It used to 
be Christianity through which people were to be saved — if they 
only could be converted. Now Christianity is sadly neglected, 
and education comes to the front. Education is expected to save 
everybody, if they will only take enough of it. People have the 
same confidence in education that they have in patent medicines. 
You are sure to be cured if you swallow enough bottles. 

Education is expected to make everybody honest, noble, lov- 
able and good, but somehow or other it does not succeed in do- 
ing anything of the kind. We have more education now than 
we have ever had before — and with it more crime, rascality and 
misery. We do not know that there is any connection between 
education and these results. We merely state the facts, and 
people may connect and compare to suit their individual tastes. 
But to tell the truth, we do not have the same high opinion of 
education, latter-day education, that some people have. We do 



NEW VIEWS OF EDUCATION. 



157 



not believe it makes people happy. We do not believe even that 
it makes men good. We doubt indeed that education of itself 
even makes gentlemen. It certainly does not make people wise. 

There are so many things that we do not know that we 
might know and ought to know — and so many things which we 
do know that ought never to have engaged our attention ! 
People may know the gossip of the day, or what is in the news- 
papers, or in the latest novel, but how little do they know of the 
things around them, the things in which they ought to be the 
most interested, even the most ordinary matters ! They have 
not learned to observe, they do not think, they do not care. 
How many there are who could not distinguish an oil painting 
from an ordinary chromo ! How many do not know one tune 
from another and cannot say whether it is Hail Columbia or 
Yankee Doodle when they hear it ! How many cannot dis- 
tinguish brass from gold, silverware from plated ware, or good 
goods from shoddy ! Nine people out of ten see as much beauty 
in a cheap imitation as in a two hundred dollar diamond. They 
know nothing about the beauties of music — it pleases them, but 
they know not why. They see nothing to interest them in 
flowers, and they have no appreciation of nature generally. 
They see nothing to interest them in rocks, because they know 
nothing of the origin and structure of rocks. In architecture 
they observe no faults and they admire no beauties, for they 
know nothing about architecture to begin with. This prevailing 
defect of mankind is not constitutional, it arises chiefly from the 
want of a properly directed education. 

We are not speaking of ignorant people necessarily. No, 
what we have said applies as well to those who consider them- 
selves intelligent as to those who know that they are not wise. 
They simply lack proper training and guidance. They may be 
educated, but it is in a superficial and imperfect manner. They 
know too much of things that do not concern them, and too 
little of things that do. It is not really their fault, but the fault 
of the times and of the people at large. Our fashions are wrong, 
and hence our customs are wrong. People do not open their eyes, 
and therefore they fail to see what they might see, if they would 
only make a little effort ; and some of them fail to see even when 
they open their eyes, simply because they are lacking in interest 
and attention. They have never cultivated as they should habits 
of thought and observation. People go even to Norway or Siberia 
and yet see nothing. There are ten thousand things, beautiful 
and interesting things, which are before their very eyes, and yet 
they fail to perceive them. Ignorance may be bliss, but if so, it 
is only the bliss that comes from blindness or darkness. 



CHAPTER XVII. 



THE MARRIAGE QUESTION. 

Marriage as we have it now, and as it has prevailed in both 
civilized and uncivilized lands for some thousands of years, is 
based upon a theory that is not now advocated by any fair- 
minded and intelligent person, namely, the slavery of woman. 
This theory has become antiquated and obsolete, but still we 
cling to the doctrine, as we do to all things that we have long 
been accustomed to regard as sacred in character. The church 
inculcates the belief in the holiness of marriage, and with us, 
even yet, the teachings of the church command the highest re- 
gard. Why should men not believe in the divine nature of mar- 
riage, as well as in the propriety of holding human beings in 
slavery, especially those of the female sex ? The Bible endorses 
the institution of marriage and that of slavery at the same time. 

Marriage, it will be observed, is not only an institution of 
religion, but it is also an affair of the state. Why this should be 
so, it is not so easy to ascertain, but that it is so, is a fact beyond 
any question. If it were not for the state, we should have 
no marriage properly so called, and no such institution as the 
family. The family is the very foundation of the state, and that 
is the reason why the state takes the subject of matrimony so 
seriously. Without the institution of marriage, with its forms 
and ceremonies, and all its necessary concomitants, we should 
have parents and children, no doubt, but not as we have parents 
and children now. Parents would have no power, no authority, 
and the children would have no duties. . A family is an institution 
very much like the state itself ; it is fully organized and has a 
head and members, with rights and privileges of its own. With- 
out the family as recognized and established by the state, there 
would be no legitimate children and no right of inheritance — 
and without such an institution as inheritance, the acquiring of 



TH3 MARRIAGE QUESTION. 



159 



wealth would not be possible. If there were no families to in- 
herit the property that has been accumulated, there would be no 
inducement for accumulation in the first place. It is easy 
enough to see what marriage is, and why it holds such a com- 
manding position as it does. As a matter of justice and prin- 
ciple, the state has really nothing to do with any domestic ar- 
rangements that a couple may agree upon, as it is beyond doubt 
wholly an affair of their own. But the state is not so much con- 
cerned about principle in any case as it is about policy. All our 
laws on the subject of marriage come under the head of state 
policy. The same is true of education. With this matter the 
state never should meddle, but it does — because policy requires 
usurpation, or innovation, in this case as it does in others. 

That there is something radically wrong in our views of 
propriety and impropriety in connection with the marriage ques- 
tion, is rendered evident by the fact that the views on that sub- 
ject change as climates and countries change. The Greeks had 
one code on social matters, and the Romans had a code that was 
entirely different. Again, the code that prevailed all over the 
East, in Asia and North Africa, differed very much from the codes 
of both Greece and Rome. Even in the various countries of 
Europe to-day, the social and domestic customs vary in many 
essential respects. In the north the code is more strict ; in the 
south it is more lax. In Roumania and Servia there is a freedom 
between the sexes that would not be tolerated even in France 
and Italy, and these countries, again, are not so strict in their 
notions of propriety as the people are in England and Germany. 
It must never be forgotten that what is proper and what is im- 
proper is wholly a matter of opinion in any case. Surely the 
people of Roumania and Servia are as much entitled to their 
opinion on this subject as the people of northern Europe are to 
theirs. It is not the prerogative of any man, or of any people, 
to set themselves up as the standard and denounce those who 
happen to differ from them as being unquestionably in the wrong. 
In deciding any question, the wisest man in the world can boast 
of nothing higher or more reliable than his opinion. 

Nothing can be established on a more unstable or more un- 
satisfactory foundation than marriage based upon love. It is 
absolutely the only business transaction where reason and com- 
mon sense are not supposed to be brought into requisition. Peo- 
ple are supposed to marry those whom they fancy, even though 
their judgment would inform them that the match would prove 
to be disastrous. 

The relations between man and wife, according to law and 
theory at least, are solely those existing between master and 



160 



THE MARRIAGE QUESTION. 



slave. As the husband owns the woman whom he marries, he 
is of course entitled to her love, and if she shows the least symp- 
tom of having a little affection for some one else, the husband 
resents this piece of infidelity, as he terms it, and there is a dis- 
turbance in the family at once. Could anything be more ridic- 
ulous, more absurd, more unjust and more unnatural than this ? 
As if love could be made subject to command ! And as if loving 
one person exhausted the fountain, and left no love for any- 
body else ! There is no being so inhuman, so tyrannical and 
so absurdly mean as the husband who has inherited all the pre- 
vailing notions as to what a married woman owes to her lord and 
master. The Orientals furnish the lowest and most vulgar type 
of the husband ; but every country throughout the civilized 
world has plenty of Blue Beards of its own. 

The wife must love her husband and him only, whether she 
does so or not — poor thing — but the husband himself is accorded 
many privileges. He stands on an eminence, and the law of 
conjugal fidelity does not apply to him. He can lead as many 
double lives as he pleases, if he is discreet in his movements and 
has the money with which to pay for his diversion. Is it to be 
wondered that, under such conditions, marriage, in very many 
cases, is a living lie ? The husband cheats his wife and the wife 
follows the example that is set for her. Each is flattered with 
the belief that it is the other alone thas is being cheated and 
deceived ! No law or code will be followed that people do not 
accept as sensible and well founded ; and when they do not be- 
lieve in a marriage code in many particulars, they will not follow 
it. We mean to say a great many will not, no matter how 
loudly they may protest nor what they may pretend. 

It will be remembered that God had a similar experience 
with his Children of Israel. He commanded them to love him 
and him only. He assured them he was a jealous God, and they 
must have no other God before them. He would not tolerate 
even so much as a photograph. But they simply could not 
meet the requirements of the case, or at least they did not. 
The Israelites were continually running after strange gods, as 
men run after strange women at the present day, just for the 
novelty of the change. Human nature has been the same from 
the beginning. It is not natural to love or admire one person 
only under any conditions. How absurd to expect that we should 
admire only one picture or only one piece of art. 

What a remarkable thing it is that women, knowing the 
facts as they do, still love slavery, or what is the same thing, 
matrimony. It delights them to hear their chains jingle, be- 
cause the chains are gilded ! They want a home — and to get 

10 



THE MARRIAGE QUESTION. 



161 



that, they will consent to be some man's abject slave forever. 
They want to love somebody, and they want somebody to love 
them — poor deluded creatures as they are ! They have been 
educated from childhood in that way. They want finery and a 
handsome cage to pine in, and then they are willing to lead a< 
captive life all the rest of their days. In too many instances the 
married woman is hardly more than some man's housekeeper. 
In other cases she is only his mistress. It seems all the more 
strange, when we consider how bright and sensible woman is in 
other departments, and see her lose her head completely when it 
comes to the subject of matrimony ! When that is the question 
to be considered, it is a rare thing to see a woman act in a ra- 
tional manner. She will surrender her name, give up all her 
possessions, and lose her identity absolutely, just to marry, in 
many cases, a fellow that does not deserve even the title of 
man ! She will do all this for love ! And what is love ? A wild 
dream, which, temporarily at least, leaves the patient in a state 
of delirium. Love is a mysterious affair — a sort of divine afflatus 
— a sacrifice, kept in vogue by the church, by the state, by 
by poets, by parents, and novel writers, in accordance with policy 
and custom. 

Have we not had enough of marriage under such conditions ? 
Are we not having enough even to-day? Boys and girls get 
married, and shortly after this more boys and girls come for the 
public to care for. Divorces are common, as one might expect. 
Marriage is a religious or sacred affair — supposed to be different 
essentially from everything else on earth — but it is not. There 
is nothing in getting married that elevates a man in the slightest 
degree — rather the contrary. Marriage is usually either a busi- 
ness arrangement, for profit or convenience, or it is the mating 
of two individuals as we find them among the lower animals. 
There is nothing very peculiar, nor very mysterious, nor very 
unnatural in the whole marriage proceeding. The priests have 
endeavored to mystify these matters, but their efforts have 
proved a failure for all except the ignorant and infatuated. 
People get married just as they sit down to eat an ordinary 
meal, simply because their desires lead them in that direction, or 
because they wish to follow a custom. That matches are made 
in Heaven, or that God stoops to meddle with the love affairs of 
silly young people, is a proposition that is too preposterous to 
dwell upon seriously for one moment. 

But people will ask, and no doubt they do ask, what shall we 
do without marriage? How could the world be replenished if 
the marriage institution ceased to exist ? That is a very natural 
question for people to ask, and the less they are inclined to think 



162 



The marriage question. 



and inquire on their own account, the more natural the ques- 
tion will prove to be. The same class of people are not able to 
see how the world could exist without crime, misery and distress, 
without wrongs and offences of all kinds, without law, without 
government, without taxes, without oppression, without punish- 
ments. For a large class of mankind it is impossible to conceive 
how the world could ever change in any essential respect. They 
imagine that as things are to-day they must forever remain. 
People reach such foolish and unfounded conclusions as these 
simply because they fail to observe and reflect. It is a well 
known fact that no institution, no being, no body of people, en- 
dures for all time. Everything perishes at last. It is perfectly 
certain that as things are now they will not be a few centuries 
hence. 

As a matter of fact only a small portion of mankind adopt 
such a marriage institution as prevails in this country. A large 
portion of the race, civilized and uncivilized, have marriage sys- 
tems of their own, and sometimes they manage to get along 
without any marriage system at all. So it is evident that our 
particular system is not indispensable. What should take its 
place ? 

That is a question that we do not pretend to answer. Per- 
haps no material change would be desirable at the present time. 
People must live a while longer and learn certain important 
lessons before a radical change is desirable. It is quite a step in 
advance to be willing to admit that our present marriage system 
is not satisfactory in its results. There are very many who be- 
lieve, as the author does sincerely, that our marriage institution 
is not established upon a sound and rational basis. It bears the 
marks of age, and its evident infirmities are numerous. There 
ought to be something, and no doubt there will be something 
some day, to take its place. It is not, or it ought not to be, a 
state institution in the first place. People ought to be free to 
marry or not to marry, as they are free to make any business 
arrangement or enter into any ordinary copartnership without 
the help or the interference of either the state or the church. 
Some rules or customs in the community having the force of law 
would have to be established in reference to children. Those 
who have children should be called upon to care for them and 
protect them until they are old enough to be quite able to care 
for themselves. There are plenty of children now, under the 
present state system, that are thrown upon the community, but 
such a state of things should not continue to exist. Laws evi- 
dently do not afford a remedy in such cases. What is required 



THE MARRIAGE QUESTION. 



163 



to regulate such matters is a strong and healthy sentiment in the 
community. 

It should be borne in mind that our marriage system, like 
our religious system and our governmental system, is only one 
out of many. It is only for the time being, and eventually it 
will disappear. When woman achieves her independence, as she 
undoubtedly will some day, she will not tolerate for a moment 
any husband and master. She will want to retain her name and 
have her own property, and when it comes to the matter of ser- 
vice, she will not cod sent to be the slave of any human being. 

What do our numberless divorces really mean ? They mean 
a great deal ; they mean that there is a radical change in public 
sentiment on this subject ; they mean that the people at large do 
not regard marriage as a sacred, binding, lasting obligation. 
But why stop where we are ? Why bother with the courts, and 
why go to all that expense and endure all that delay ? If divorce 
is a good and proper thing for one party, why not for all ? Even 
as it is, it is a matter wholly determined by and between the 
parties themselves. They agree that they desire a divorce, and 
all that the state or the court does in the premises is to give its 
sanction. But again we ask, why so much expense and delay ? 
Why not buy permissions for divorce as we buy tickets to the 
show? Or rather, why should we be compelled to buy permis- 
sions at all ? It would be just as well for the parties to agree 
upon the step and divorce themselves. That is the way they do 
in Egypt, and in other countries of the East. Where people get 
married easily, they necessarily become unmarried easily. It 
has always been so, and it always will be so. 

People begin to understand that marriage binds too much in 
some directions and too little in others. It binds the poor, but 
it does not bind the rich ; the rich can do as they please, and 
they can get married and unmarried as they like. They marry 
to get divorced, and get divorced to marry. Again, the restric- 
tions upon the unmarried are too unreasonable and too severe. 
The married can do very much as they please, simply because 
they are married. They can flirt and court and bathe, and have 
all sorts of amusements — but the unmarried must be more cir- 
cumspect. However, when a thing is wrong, it will be rectified 
in due time, and so there will be a rectification in our marriage 
relations some time or other. We do not know just how the 
matter will be finally regulated, but that public opinion will 
adjust the business satisfactorily in the end, we regard as a 
matter of certainty. 

We might add that marriage as we have it is not a Christian 
institution ; it is a Roman institution, and our laws on the sub- 



164 



THE MARRIAGE QUESTION. 



ject are Roman in principle. The New Testament does not favor 
marriage ; Christ never married and he had no regard even for 
his own family ; and as to Paul, it is well known that he had 
anything but a high regard for woman. The old Roman theory 
was that when a woman married she quitted her own family and 
the gods of her family forever, and henceforth she adored the 
gods of her husband and his family. And this is our theory to- 
day. When a woman marries, she turns her back upon her own 
family, because she cannot belong to two families at one and the 
same time. She surrenders everything. 

It may not be amiss to explain, in this connection, that the 
difference between polygamy and monogamy as systems is rather 
apparent than real. In the East, if a man is rich, he has several 
wives, while in Christian countries, if a man is wealthy, it is 
quite common for him to have several concubines. It is not law 
that settles such matters, either in the East or West. Even in 
the East, in Turkey for instance, husbands usually have but one 
wife, simply because it is found to be expensive and otherwise 
disadvantageous to have a larger number. 



CHAPTEK XVIII. 



THE INSUFFICIENCY OF EVIDENCE. 

We should first of all endeavor to get a clear idea of what 
constitutes proof. As a matter of fact there is no real proof, 
though there are several forms of evidence that pass for proof. 
What is called evidence is what affects some people one way and 
others differently. There is nothing that serves as actual proof ; 
there is nothing that could properly be called demonstration. 
Proof in mathematics, in physics and metaphysics is wholly a 
delusion. It must be a delusion, for if it were real proof, it 
would be proof for everybody and~ conviction would be a neces- 
sary result. So we have proof in criminal trials, as if crimes, or 
wrong doing of which none but the culprit himself could be a 
witness, could ever be proven ! Even if he confessed his guilt, it 
would not be proved. Suffice it to say at best only a few people 
believe a few things. Proof has but little effect upon most 
people. Whether they believe or not, is a matter of indifference 
to them. How many different sects take their rise from one and 
the same source, from the Bible for instance ! From the fact 
that there is no proof, arises the other fact that no two men fully 
agree in their opinions and convictions. 

If we could get this proof delusion removed from our minds, 
what a blessed relief it would prove to be for mankind ! It is a 
burden that embarrasses us at every step and continually retards 
our progress. There is no such a thing even as a semblance of 
proof. Prove people guilty ! How? It has never yet been done. 
All proof is inference, opinion, conclusion, belief — nothing more. 
Indeed, all seeing is inference and it is the result of reflection. 
We hear about mathematical proof, logical proof, documentary 
proof, witness proof, and proofs of other kinds. What are they, 
and what do they amount to ? For people who wish to be con- 
vinced, anything is proof ; for those who will not be convinced, 



166 



THE INSUFFICIENCY OF EVIDENCE. 



nothing is proof. That is the history of the world throughout 
all ages. Proof at best is a mere statement of facts, with an 
appeal to the reason of men. The effect of this is different upon 
different people. Proof is like medicine. While it cures some 
people, it makes no perceptible impression upon others — and 
what its real effect will be in any case, nobody can determine in 
advance. 

What a wonderful power men would have if there were such 
a thing as proof ! All they would have to do would be to bring 
forward their evidence, and people would be hypnotized at once, 
and so remain forever. It would be of very great benefit to the 
author of this work most assuredly. As it is, he brings forward 
the most indubitable proof, as it seems to him, and yet very few 
appear to be seriously affected thereby — only an occasional one 
here and there. Whereas, if he had that elixir of proof so much 
extolled by some, he might make an indefinite number of con- 
verts without the least delay. 

Proof at best is merely what is probable — the word itself 
shows that. It is only a form of the Latin probo ; and evidence 
is only what -seems or appears to be. Things may be as they 
seem, or they may not. All proof is inference, and inference 
can never be relied on. 

One kind of proof is very common, the proof that depends 
upon authority. A great many believe what Plato or Aristotle 
said, merely because these ancients said it ; and so people believe 
what they find in the Bible, merely because it is in the Bible. 
They take things on trust, or on credit, but it is a very unsafe 
course to follow. Authority-proof is no better than any other 
proof ; in fact it is no "proof at all. What people say in any case 
is no more proof than what they dream. Why should we be- 
lieve Plato or Aristotle, or Herbert Spencer or Tolstoi? They 
were or are ordinary men with opinions, and we are ordinary 
men with opinions also. Where is the difference ? How does 
one come to be better authority than the other ? 

The whole office of proof is to demonstrate that things are 
true. But truth, as we have found it, is a very variable and 
intangible essence. When we have it, we are never certain that 
we have it. In fact, we never attain truth. The very farthest 
that we can reach in this direction is to an approximation of 
truth, to probability. Things that are really true are only par- 
tially true, approximately true. 

Proof starts with assumption, with error in the first place. 
We stumble around in the dark trying to find the true way — 
but we never discover it. There are no rules or laws without 
plenty of exceptions. So it is with all truths — they are only 



THE INSUFFICIENCY OF EVIDENCE. 



167 



qualifiedly true. How could any fact continue to be a fact when 
all things, as we know, are constantly changing ? Nothing ever 
happens twice alike. 

To illustrate what truth is and what proof amounts to, we 
might give a few examples : Nothing is good, or handsome, or 
valuable of itself. It is only as men consider it. No woman i& 
handsome until she is considered handsome, and no man is 
famous until he is pronounced famous ; just as no man is a true 
king till he is anointed and crowned king. If the handsomest 
woman in the world were considered homely, could she still be 
called handsome ? What makes a woman pretty is simply what 
people say about her. It all depends upon how her features and 
manner impress people. If they say she is not pretty, she is a 
rejected candidate, and she loses the prize. Nothing is worth 
ten dollars except that which is current at that rating. No man 
is good except him who is considered good. All we mean by a 
man's being good is that he bears that reputation among men. 
If he were reputed to be bad, would he be pronounced good? 
No matter how good a man is, he is a bad man, if people con- 
sider him so. So much for truth. No matter what may be a 
man's reputation, his character and conduct must be such as to 
give him the reputation that he bears. Surely all men are not 
considered bad. The difference between the reputation of men 
who are considered bad and those who are considered good is an 
evidence that there is a real difference between the men, but that 
difference is undefinable. 

Indeed, what good does it do any man to do anything or 
possess any merit, unless he happens to be accepted, canonized 
as it were, by the people ? It is not the achievements of men 
that make their reputation. That is solely the work of history 
and tradition. We come back to our old position : Nothing is 
good except what is considered good, and so with all qualities. 
Qualities of objects lie wholly in the thoughts of men. 

What men say is no proof, because men do not always say 
what they mean, nor do they mean what they say. Words have 
different meanings, and it often happens that the speaker uses 
them in one application and the hearer accepts them in another 
sense. The meaning of words is extremely elastic, and from 
that fact it happens that no two men get exactly the same sense 
from the same words. Perhaps two men never do. 

How many ways of proving things have there been ! Some- 
times there is proof by combat, sometimes by ordeal, sometimes 
by torture. These systems are generally discarded now, but for 
hundreds of years in Europe they prevailed as the sure mode of 
securing truth ; and in some countries these principles are not 



16S 



THE INSUFFICIENCY OF EVIDENCE. 



discarded yet. Even many of us believe that a man may be so 
tortured that he will be forced to confess the truth. This kind 
of proof is supposed to be wholly God's work. But in all cases 
where an opinion is arrived at and a decision rendered, it is 
wholly a matter of inference. If such and such things had 
happened then certain other things must have followed as a 
matter of necessity. That is the doctrine. 

So to-day we hear what this one states and that one states ; 
we consult this or that record, and make this or that inquiry. 
Then we compare notes and draw our conclusion ! But what 
has been demonstrated ? It must not be forgotten that all proof 
lies in the conclusions which are drawn from premises. Some 
men will draw one conclusion and others will draw another from 
the same evidence. How very uncertain a thing is proof always ! 
Mathematics affords no better proof than that obtained from 
other sources. Everything there is mere inference. It all de- 
pends m the first place upon a supposition, upon things taken 
for granted, upon things which could not be proven in any 
manner. All depends on an ;> if." If this is so. that must be so. 
How do we know that it must be so ? Facts that are facts are 
independent of each other, and there is no place for an '"if.*' 
Things that are true, confessedly true, need no proof. So, if a 
man is guilty of a crime, and we know he is guilty, how do we 
strengthen the case by proving him guilty ? Proof at all times is 
a mere meaningless ceremony. It is simply a matter of form. 
What has proof to do with the question any way ? If A has 
stolen a horse, and we know he has, we have no need to have 
any one prove the fact to us ; and for him who does not know 
that he has committed the act, no proof would avail. Hearsay 
is never evidence — never reliable evidence. More things are said 
that are not true than things that are true. Every trial is based 
on doubt ; if there were no doubt, there would be no need of a 
trial. How is that doubt removed? It never is removed, except 
for those who wish to be convinced. Eeally, a trial never re- 
moves doubt ; and the facts remain precisely as they were in the 
beginning. To appreciate how uncertain the decisions of a court 
are. notice how often they are reversed — and more would be 
reversed, if more appeals were taken. What is called the agree- 
ment of a jury is generally a pure fiction. They do not agree, 
they merely compromise or submit. They are influenced by 
their colleagues or are anxious about their supper or dismissal. 
Such is proof ! 

It must not be overlooked that among men people are 
punished not because they are guilty but because they have been 
convicted. The trial and the verdict are the true cause of the 



THE INSUFFICIENCY OF EVIDENCE. 



169 



prisoner's being punished. Those who are not tried are not 
punished — they simply escape. Why ? Not because they are 
not guilty by any means. As we have said before, guilt has 
nothing to do with a man's being punished. Perhaps as many 
innocent men are punished as those who are guilty. And cer- 
tainly the innocent are continually the sufferers for the wrongs 
of the guilty. What is justice ? Is wickedness never profitable ? 
Unquestionably as many guilty ones escape as are ever punished. 

A court trial, what a farce it is ! What evidence, what real 
evidence, does it afford, what proof of innocence or guilt does it 
give in any instance? It begins with an assumption — of the 
guilt of the accused — and ends with an opinion, that formed by 
the court. That is all. Do witnesses in court never swear to a 
lie? Do they ever swear to the truth, properly considered ? 

Let us get rid of inferences of all kinds. What reliance can 
be placed upon inferences ? They may be right, and they may 
be wrong — there is no certainty either way. So it is far better 
that we discard inferences altogether. Let us never dream of 
convicting any one of a crime upon such flimsy evidence as an 
inference ! Circumstantial evidence is conceded to be only an 
excuse or a substitute for evidence. It is a sham and a piece of 
folly. Let us cease to amuse ourselves or deceive others with 
any such dumb show as this. 

All the evidence in the world, documentary, oral or other- 
wise, would not suffice to change a man's opinions. In fact in 
this case neither quantity nor quality makes much difference. 
Evidence has some effect, but belief is a matter of growth, and 
evidence alone will never do the business. A man's belief is 
based upon something besides evidence. How very many things 
do we believe without any evidence, and even against evidence. 
All our religious convictions are a matter of faith, not evidence. 
Faith is beyond and outside of evidence, and it has no connection 
with evidence. Faith comes from visions, revelation, inspiration, 
and has no regard to evidence. Very slight things — even no 
evidence at all — cause us to believe or disbelieve. So it is in 
court trials, so in our everyday life. We should not argue with 
men and try to convince them — it is labor lost as a general thing. 
Calling a man a fool is not proof. Men will or will not be con- 
vinced as they please. Before we can convince people, they 
must see and understand things as we do, but that is something 
that rarely happens. The great question is, what enables people 
to see and understand ? Surely what we say does not have that 
effect. Again we observe, no evidence is proof ; it is mere in- 
ference, somebody's opinion, and nothing more. 

The most notable fact in regard to evidence in court is that 



170 



THE INSUFFICIENCY OF EVIDENCE. 



it depends wholly upon observation and memory, and yet it is 
well known that nothing is more variable and more unreliable 
than observation, and nothing is more treacherous than memory. 
Most people do not observe carefully, and others do not remem- 
ber well. And then to think that men should be convicted of 
crime on the evidence of those who merely think, remember and 
believe ! Is not the question of proof really a vital question ? 

Proof, finally, amounts to simply this : "I think the facts of 
the case are so and so. Now what do you think? I would like 
to have you think as I think ! " Evidence, taken even in its 
broadest sense, is merely what seems to some people. It never 
seem* in the siime way to all people. Proof is only our view of the 
case and our way of presenting it. But do we ourselves see 
objects clearly, fully, justly? 

It should not be forgotten that when we see an object, we 
only see a part of it and at best only one side of it. That is the 
reason why pictures are never wholly satisfactory. They only 
present the object as seen from one point of view. As a matter 
of fact when we look at an object, we see it as a whole and we 
overlook many of its special points and features. Again, when 
we direct our attention to the points and the various parts, we 
overlook the object as a whole. Indeed, how could we include 
at one view the whole of a long or a large object? As a matter 
of fact we do not. When the painter paints a picture, he pre- 
sents only what strikes his eye, or what commands his attention, 
and he ignores all the rest. Most of the points are overlooked. 
Hence it is that no two or a dozen men paint the same object 
alike, because they all see the object differently. So it is with 
all our ideas and conceptions. Much is in the eye, and still more 
in the glass through which we make our observations. Much is 
in the camera in photography, much in the paper, much in the 
light and shadow, and much in the position of the one whose 
picture is being taken. Every picture is ideal rather than natural. 
Things are not presented as they are ; pictures merely present 
the painter's own idea or conception — nothing more. And at 
best, it must be remembered, we see only the outside of things — 
never the inside, never the things themselves. 



CHAPTER XIX. 



TRIALS IN COURT. 

An absurd belief seems to prevail that there are no trials but 
those at court ; that if a man is not arrested and brought before 
such a court, or if he is arrested and not found guilty, he is 
unquestionably innocent. But such conclusions do not neces- 
sarily follow. 

As a matter of fact, trials in court are very rare occurrences , 
compared with the investigations made and the verdicts rendered 
by that silent tribunal known as the community. Every man 
and every woman who remains for any length of time in any 
town or locality is compelled to undergo one or more investiga- 
tions of this character. The interested party is not arrested, or 
brought into court, or even molested in any way. The court 
under consideration does its work in a very quiet, unostentatious 
manner, but its decisions are none the less effective after they 
are rendered. The collecting and sifting of the evidence goes on 
slowly and imperceptibly, but when it is once fully digested, the 
proof afforded is far more reliable than that which is obtained in 
any court of law. No report is made, and the services of no 
officer are brought into requisition ; no fetters are required, no 
jail or lock-up is used, and no punishment is inflicted of any 
kind. But a lasting and reliable verdict is rendered, and it de- 
termines the party's standing in the community so long as he 
remains one of its members. To alter a person's rating at some 
future time would require new and important evidence and a 
deliberate rehearing of the case. 

How much better every way is such a verdict — how much 
more sensible and reliable — than a verdict rendered in a court at 
law, with its Middle Age appliances and its strange parapher- 
nalia ! A trial in court is a one-sided affair, and it is always un- 
just either to one party or the other. It presents at best only 



172 



TRIALS IX COURT. 



one view of the case, like the photograph of a person at a single 
sitting. The community always knows a great deal more about 
its citizens than it ever gets credit for— more of their history, 
their habits, their inclinations, their dispositions, their propensi- 
ties and a hundred other things that enter into the make up of a 
man. than is commonly supposed. What does the court know of 
a man who presents himself either as a witness or a party, being- 
seen only for an hour, or perhaps a day? It can know absolutely 
nothing of his real character, or his merits and demerits, and for 
that reason every trial at law is a palpable farce, so far as justice 
or proof is concerned. 

The community when it enters upon its deliberations, does 
its work coolly, and it is quite indifferent as to whether its busi- 
ness is finished in a day or a year. It does not go in search of 
evidence — it takes it as it comes, and catches it usually on the 
fly. This tiling and that thing are put together, and a conclu- 
sion is finally drawn. Rarely indeed does a community ever make a 
mistake in its verdict, while it is known that tlie court often errs. 

As we have already intimated, the condemned party is 
neither imprisoned nor driven from town — though the latter 
course was sometimes resorted to in olden times. It is not nec- 
essary to expatriate a man. culprit though he is known to be : 
nor is it necessary to confine him or torture him in any way. 
But people usually deal with such persons at arms* length, and 
always look upon them as suspects. In practically all communi- 
ties, especially the larger towns, there are all sorts of men. good, 
bad and indifferent, and they all have their proper rating among 
those with whom they associate. Many people have the idea, 
absurd as it is. that all wicked, corrupt and even dangerous per- 
sons are in prison. That is a serious misapprehension indeed. 
Not one in a hundred, perhaps not one in a thousand, of these 
classes are in prison — they have not even been apprehended. 

People meet in their walks every day those that they know 
are not honest or trustworthy citizens, and who perhaps are 
swindlers, thieves, robbers, dead-beats, deceivers, incendiaries. 
And in some cases those who are known to be murderers are 
allowed to be at large. Nothing is said about these things out 
loud, and nothing appears in the newspapers, because if charges 
were made they could not be proven, according to the insuffi- 
cient rules of legal evidence. But those who imagine that there 
is no such permanent vigilance committee as the community 
certainly make a mistake. The guilty may escape a long time, 
but they are pretty certain to be caught at last. People, whether 
in high or low positions, can keep their crimes, scandals and 
rascalities out of the newspapers, but they cannot keep them 



TRIALS IN COURT. 



173 



out of the thoughts and mouths of those whom they meet in the 
streets every day. The court can even be fooled — in some cases 
it can be influenced — but the community in which a man or 
woman lives will always be found an impartial and incorrup- 
tible judge. The public has no interest, no feeling, no prejudice ; 
it is therefore, like a thermometer, infallible in its decisions. 
People often make the mistake that the ostrich is said to make. 
This bird hides its head in the sand and imagines that its whole 
body is concealed. 

In the primitive state of man, each individual judges and 
decides for himself, as every man should do at all times. Trials 
and courts and governments are an abomination in the land, and 
it is a fact that such institutions, in the earlier ages of the world, 
did not exist. These institutions are the accumulated results of 
aggressiveness and usurpation on the part of designing and am- 
bitious men, continued for an indefinite time. They are designed 
for the promotion of evil and not for the accomplishment of 
good. 

We must remember that, even in the earlier centuries in 
which our ancestors lived, courts and trials were by no means 
what they are now. There was no production of evidence, and 
no pretence to proof of any kind. It was a mere lottery ; the 
whole business was left with God. It was an ordeal, a decision 
of Providence, a victory for the strongest — or perhaps for the 
shrewdest and most influential. As a matter of fact, no one 
pretends that anything was proved against the defendant. It was 
then a question of men and means, a matter of force and artifice, 
as it is still. Even now a man makes little progress in law with- 
out friends to aid him and plenty of means at his command. 
Without the help of these agencies, he might as well surrender 
at discretion and leave the field at once. 

Again, we say trials decide absolutely nothing that was not 
decided when the battle began. All that is done in law is simply 
to give one party or the other the advantage. It would be im- 
possible for the government to be on both sides, and so it must 
choose between the parties — and this is precisely what is done in 
every case. For instance, a man has been killed in a railroad 
accident. His friends, being lovers of money, demand ten 
thousand dollars, or perhaps one hundred thousand dollars, as a 
balm for their wounded feelings. The company say the de- 
mand is exorbitant. As no doubt it is. But who shall decide? 
Who shall say whether the company shall pay ten thousand or 
one hundred thousand, or nothing at all ? The court decides — a 
party that really knows nothing of the case and has no interest 
either way ! The court decides. And how manifestly unjust is 



174 TRIALS Eff COURT. 

its decision ! The railroad, company probably have control of a 
large amount of funds. But what right has any outside party 
to touch a dollar of their money or to demand an apportionment? 
Right in any of its phases, in such a case, cannot possibly be said 
to enter into the consideration of the subject. Whether the 
verdict in this instance should be ten dollars, or a thousand, or a 
million, who shall presume to declare ? Clearly any one of these 
sums is as near to being just as either of the other two. The 
whole case is determined by the question how much a man de- 
mands and how much, by good luck or other means, he can suc- 
ceed in obtaining. The word justice should not be thought of or 
mentioned in any such connection. As between men and men, 
there is no justice. Justice is a matter of power. There is no 
other justice than that which comes from power. AVhat good 
would it do a man to have rights, to have justice on his side, if 
these things could not be enforced? Justice is simply what is 
commanded, and if nothing were commanded, if nothing were 
settled, of course there could be no justice. Without the decis- 
ion of courts in some form, we should never know what justice 
is. Justice in courts lies wholly in the verdict, and nowhere else. 

It must be remembered that it is force — pure brute force in 
the end — that settles all questions of law. If a verdict could not 
be enforced, there would be no need of having one. Men sub- 
mit not because they wish, not because they consider the verdict 
just, but because they must. It is the lesser of two evils to sub- 
mit : not to submit might cause them more pain than to pursue 
the other course. If men were stronger, or even more courage- 
ous, than they are they would not submit, and then there would 
be no occasion for trials, and certainly no occasion for judg- 
ments and executions. Such things are available only for those 
who are ready to submit. We submit to the robber only be- 
cause he has us at a disadvantage. Perhaps he has more guns 
than we have, or those of a better make. Men submit not be- 
cause they desire to submit, or because they feel that they have 
been justly treated, but because they see no other avenue open 
to them. In other words, we submit to the powers above be- 
cause we know we are slaves and are willing to go on playing 
the servile part a while longer. We are told it is the people's 
will that we should obey. But the people's will is a farce. 
There is no people's will ; there is no people in the first place, 
none in the proper sense of the term. There are some men and 
women, but no body of men besides these. 

We hear about fair trials. But there never was such a thing 
as a fair trial, that is, fair to both sides. What is fair to one 
man is always an injustice to another man. 



TRIALS IN COURT. 



175 



People pretend to love fairness in all cases, and no doubt 
-they really think they do. But if they love fairness, how can 
they believe in trials and battles ? These contests are never fair 
— they never can be fair. The parties are never of equal 
strength, and one always gets the advantage over the other in 
■some way. No, people should forever banish the absurd notion 
that there can be such things as fair combats. Was Dewey's 
battle at Manilla in any sense fair to the conquered party ? Was 
Schley's battle at Santiago a sample of fair play ? Was Schley's 
trial in Washington fair, or that of Dreyfus in Paris fair ? Is it 
fair to the exhausted fox to be chased by the overpowering 
hounds ? Are the bull fights of Madrid fair to the bull ? No, 
there is no fairness in conflicts at any time. If they were fair, 
there could be no victories, for the forces would be evenly bal- 
anced. Is fairness to be found anywhere? Even justice is al- 
ways one-sided. In every case of justice, one loses what the 
other gains. 

All courts, condemnations and convictions must be over- 
thrown eventually. They are contrary to the enlightened spirit 
of the age. They are against truth, against justice, against com- 
mon sense, against all ideas of fairness, and against all the pre- 
vailing tendencies of the present day. Wrongs are tolerated by 
people simply because they have not opened their eyes and come 
to view them as wrongs. There is no one great judge, and so 
there ought to be no little judges. Next to an executioner, and 
hardly next, is a judge — a common man who convicts other men 
and hands them over to be executed ! Is a judge a better man 
than other men in any one respect ? Does he know more, is he 
more gifted, is he purer, is he more infallible? Whence comes 
his commission? From common men, always from men like 
himself — and besides from men who are in no sense worthier or 
better than the prisoner whom he convicts. It is a serious mis- 
take, a great misconception, to suppose for a moment that judges 
as a class are better or wiser than other men. They are always 
taken from the common walks of life — they are never godlike, 
they are only men. 

The absurd doctrine that is constantly taught to the un- 
suspecting believer in connection with the divine right of kings, 
or at least with the divine right of government, is that trials 
transform old facts in some way, or at least develop new ones ; 
that the verdict of the court or jury gives to men rights, priv- 
ileges and sanctions that they could not obtain in any other way ! 
The right to kill, to murder, to torture, to destroy, or at least to 
immure offending persons in some dreadful dungeon ! And what 
is a trial? Nothing but a flimsy formality, a mere ceremony 



176 



JUSTICE AND REVENGE. 



without the slightest efficacy or value. All that is gained by a 
lawsuit is to enable a man to learn what his enemies have to say 
against him. Nothing more. Fairness is never at home in a 
lawsuit, any more than it is in a contest on the battle field or be- 
tween two men who have met to kill each other. In all combats 
one side is weaker than the other. 

The foundation of the trial lies in the oath. A trial is sup- 
posed to differ from a common transaction because in the trial 
men swear to what they say, and thus God is brought into court 
and becomes interested in the proceedings in some unexplainable 
manner. But what an uncertain and unsafe foundation is that 
which is supposed to be found in an oath ! It is as chimerical as 
God is himself. 



CHAPTER XX. 
JUSTICE AND REVENGE. 

What is Justice ? Like everything else, it is merely what we 
think it is, and consequently what is justice for one may not 
necessarily be justice for another. "What men think and believe 
is affected largely by what they conceive to be their personal in- 
terests ; and as men's interests differ, their thoughts and con- 
clusions in regard to justice differ. Hence justice varies with- 
parties, with sects, with countries, with climates, with condi- 
tions. There is no justice such as we conceive it to be — no justice 
for everybody, nor for all time. 

What sort of an example of justice did God himself set? 
He sacrificed his only begotten son, who presented in his person 
the noblest and purest form of humanity yet known to man. 
Such a being was sacrificed in a most cruel and unjust manner, 
not for any sins that he had committed, but to relieve a lot 
of sinful and rebellious people from the penalty of their own 
transgressions. What a conception of right and duty is ex- 
hibited in this remarkable transaction ! It was evidently God's 
purpose to favor a number of wicked people who had no merit 
and who deserved no favors. At whose expense? At the ex- 
pense of Christ. That happens in all cases where favors are bestowed 
and sacrifices are made. Some one must be sacrificed and some 
one must pay the expense of the favors granted. Usually the 

11 



JUSTICE AND REVENGE. 



177 



burden in such cases falls upon those who are entirely innocent. 
In the case above referred to, Christ was the Lamb that, was 
offered to God, his father, by his father ! Is there any justice to 
be found anywhere that corresponds with what we have all 
along believed justice to be? Do men suffer for their sins? Do 
men suffer solely for their own sins ? No, most of our sufferings 
arise from the folly, ignorance, stupidity, recklessness or willful- 
ness of other people. In all cases of sacrifice, of which we have 
many examples daily, it is the innocent one that is converted 
into a scape-goat to save transgressors from the penalties they 
have incurred. We are continually paying debts that we have 
not contracted, and bearing burdens that belong on other people's 
shoulders. How many individuals are killed or crippled daily 
through the greed or carelessness of others ! Children suffer for 
the wrongs of the parents, and parents for the wrongs of their 
children. Whole communities, and sometimes a corporation, 
suffer grievously for the shortcomings of some of their members. 

What is justice ? It is time that we had new views on this 
subject. At present we are all astray on the matter. We really 
do not know much about the nature of justice, though we are 
continually talking about it. What is just for one man must 
always be unjust for others, as what is left for one man is right 
for another man, and what is east from one place is west from 
another place. 

Justice is simply what is commanded — that is what the word 
meant in its original signification. If we had no government, 
no commands could be given, and we should therefore have no 
such thing as justice. Men in their native or natural state do 
not talk about justice. Justice is revenge, compensation, mak- 
ing things even, an eye for an eye ; and it implies a judge who 
shall decide what is the proper measure of compensation. Jus- 
tice is always a good thing for a few people, and a bad thing for a 
great many others. 

Justice is feelingless, merciless, cruel. It is an iron rule that 
is destitute of all flexibility, all elasticity. Justice identifies 
itself in all cases with law ; like the law, which must always be 
fulfilled, justice must be done though the heavens fall. Law and 
justice are both inflexible ; they never adapt themselves to cir- 
cumstances in any case. Justice always carries a sword, and it 
is blind. It cuts down everything in its path, the guilty and the 
innocent alike. Justice carries a pair of scales, but it can 
weigh only things that are lawful and things that are unlawful. 
Whether things are right or wrong, cannot be determined by the 
balance that Justice carries. 

To be just, a man must first know what justice is. But how 



178 



JUSTICE AND REVENGE. 



shall lie become enlightened on that point ? At best it is simply 
what some people think or what some people say. Justice, as 
already indicated, is wholly a matter of law in some form. It rests 
entirely upon decisions and opinions. Truth and justice are 
similar in character, and both are alike evanescent. There is no 
justice outside of these narrow limits. 

We continually argue about justice and fairness, but is there 
any justice and fairness to all men in everyday life? Is war 
fair? Is law fair? Is business fair? In war, m law, in business 
the helpless and the destitute are always taken at a disadvan- 
tage. Is there any fairness in forcing a man to pay our prices 
simply because he is in need ? Is there any fairness in a man's 
getting rich by the profits he makes ? Things may be legitimate 
and yet not fair. 

There remains one more phase of justice to be considered, 
namely this, that praise, protection, and favors of all kinds, can 
never be just to all parties. To applaud one person is an implied 
censure, or at least a reflection, upon all others who come in the 
same connection. To say that one man in a concert did well is 
to indicate or imply that some one else, or all the rest, did not do 
so well. So everybody rises at the expense of some one else. 
When one end of the board goes up the other end must go down. 
You cannot separate extremes. They always go by couples. 
When you give to a few you wrong those to whom you do not 
give. To be just one must give to all. To save one of two 
drowning men, is to let the other man perish, and it is clearly an 
act of injustice. To put one man above another, is the same as 
putting the latter below the former. The result is precisely the 
same and the act cannot be called justice in either instance. 



The transition from Justice to Revenge is easy, for there is 
but little difference between the two. What feature appears 
most conspicuous in the history of all peoples, especially people 
in their early stages? It is revenge, combined generally with 
some redeeming qualities — a mixture of the good and bad, kind- 
ness m one direction with deliberate cruelty in another direc- 
tion, unbounded hospitality in some cases with the most heartless 
cruelty and injustice in other cases. The natural impulse of 
savages is to kill those whom they dread, those who have of- 
fended them, or those who have done them some injury. Killing 
enemies seems to them to be the most effective measure of safety. 
When a man is dead, they consider that he is out of the way. 
Revenge is peculiarly a characteristic of people in the savage 



JUSTICE AXD REVENGE. 



179 



state. In revenge they imagine that they find their chief source 
of self -protection . 

But revenge, like force of every kind, continues to act and 
react indefinitely. When one man kills another, that is rarely 
the end of the business. The victim has friends, and the mur- 
derer has friends, and thus feuds arise. If revenge is a good 
practice for one side, it ought to be equally good for the other 
side : and it is good as well to-morrow and forever as it is to-day. 
Thus it is that revenge tends to operate in all cases. Instead of 
being a remedy for disease, it opens new wounds. No, revenge 
cannot under any circumstances be considered a remedy. Its 
work is always that of a madman, of a man who acts from a 
morbid impulse and takes no thought of consequences. We have 
revenge in punishment : in fact punishment is always prompted 
by revenge. But does punishment ever improve matters? Is it 
a balm? Does it ever heal wounds? Does it afford protection? 
No, it is a powerful incentive to renewed attacks. Does it give 
us peace and happiness, or even prosperity? Does it afford im- 
provement in any form or in any direction? No, revenge is the 
demon of destruction ; its ultimate aim in all cases is total anni- 
hilation, Revenge is madness : it leads us to suffer much in 
order to be enabled to see our enemies suffer more. 

Does revenge ever prevent war ? No. it is the cause of war. 
And is war a remedy? Does it promote happiness and pros- 
perity ? No. it is well known that war, like revenge, ends in de- 
struction. Do we get peace by fighting? No, we get more fight- 
ing. War seldom ends till one party or the other is anni- 
hilated or exhausted. Peace does not come from fighting but 
from some other cause — from the cessation of fighting. People 
never think of peace until they are tired of fighting or unable to 
continue the contest. People never talk or think about peace so 
long as they are strong and in good fighting condition. 

Peace is something that is always to be favored. People 
prosper in peace, but they never prosper while engaged in war. 
Fighting destroys, but it never improves : it never supplies a 
people with a better character or alters their old convictions in 
any essential respect. Changes among people must come, like 
changes in individuals, from within. External influences cannot 
alone change character. We may add that people never gain 
their liberties by fighting : but they usually secure new masters. 
The American colonies fought the mother government to gain 
their liberties, but they only succeeded in changing masters, and 
they have masters even at this clay. As to taxes, about which 
our forefathers complained so bitterly, we have ten or twenty 
times as much per capita as the Revolutionary fathers ever had. 
So it has been with France since the revolution of 1789. 



I 



CHAPTER XXL 
PUNISHMENT AND TORTURE. 

Punishment under any circumstances is diabolical. It is an 
inheritance that has come down to us from barbarous times, and 
as such it deserves to be condemned and reprobated by every 
worthy citizen. To punish means to inflict pain upon those who 
have given us offense, and the motive that prompts us is the 
pleasure we feel in seeing them writhe and suffer. Revenge is 
the beginning and end of punishment. 

What good results from such an operation ? Absolutely none 
at all, either to the one that suffers or to the one who causes the 
suffering. Sometimes it is said that we punish to prevent crime. 
But we know as a matter of fact that punishment does not pre- 
vent crime, certainly not the crime that has been committed, and 
the evidence all goes to show that punishment does not even 
lessen crime. No, we punish people because they deserve it, be- 
cause our Bible says so, because we have always done that way 
and because we are exasperated and want revenge. That is rea- 
son enough, the people think. 

Notice that we do not punish all people, but only those who 
have done wrong. Who says they have done wrong ? We say 
so. But how do we know ? Who made us the judge over our 
fellow men, under any circumstances? Christ says: "Judge 
not." And still we try men, we judge men, we convict them, 
we punish them. The prisoner himself never has a word to say 
about the business. Is that not passing strange ? How did the 
criminal, as we call the one whom we do not happen to like, lose 
his rights ? The convict in state prison has properly as many 
rights as any man has who lives outside of prison walls. We 
can imprison a man, we can cut off his ears or sever his head — 
but it is not in the power of any human being to take from him 
his vested or natural rights as a man and a citizen. 

When one man murders another man, and we, having the 



PUNISHMENT AND TORTURE. 



181 



power in our own hands, hang the murderer, what is the differ- 
ence in the crime in the two cases ? No difference, except that 
the murder by hanging a man is the most cold blooded of the 
two. When a crime is committed in the name and under the 
sanction of the law, how does it differ from a crime committed 
under other circumstances ? There is an excuse for it, a justifica- 
tion, they say ! Who says so ? Why, the party that wants to be 
excused says so. But the party that suffers does not say so. 
Excuses have never yet changed the character of any act of 
wrong doing. Excuses do not excuse England in India and 
South Africa, nor Germany for its crimes in China. If there is 
a hell, and we sometimes suspect there is, or there ought to be, 
it must be paved with such excuses. Was there ever a crime 
committed in all this world that did not have some excuse to 
justify it, in the mind at least of the one who is guilty of the 
offense ? When Alexander killed Clitus, did he not have an ex- 
cuse ? Clitus was impertinent, and besides Alexander was drunk 
— a very good excuse indeed, for a king. Henry VIII. had a 
most satifactory excuse for disposing of his several wives as he 
did — he wanted them out of the way. Old Blue Beard had ex- 
cellent excuses in the same direction. When Napoleon had three 
thousand Turkish prisoners murdered at Jaffa, he had as good a 
reason for his crime as any man ever had, in his own mind. We 
stand horror stricken and think of the suffering caused by the 
Inquisitors and by religious persecutions generally, in the Middle 
Ages. But let us turn our thoughts nearer home and see if we 
to-day are in any sense better than those Inquisitors and per- 
secutors of which we complain so bitterly. For those people the 
heretic was the very worst of criminals, and so, as they imag- 
ined, they had a right to torture and torment the offender. We 
do precisely the same thing every time we imprison or torture a 
prisoner under any pretence. We not only cause him pain just 
to see him writhe and suffer, but we make his family wretched 
and often leave them desolate and heart-stricken. These fright- 
ful crimes are committed every day, in some part of the land, 
with the sanction of law and in the name of God. We think it 
is horrible to lynch a man, but that is simply becanse it is not 
lawful. But doubtless it hurts a man just as badly to be hung 
on a gallows as to the limb of a tree. Finally, what makes it 
right to punish offenders as we do? Nothing but the opinions of 
the people. If we could get people to change their opinions on 
the question, punishments would cease at once, and so would 
crimes and offences. That is the way that chattel slavery ceased 
— people simply changed their minds, and what was right before 
is wrong now. 



182 



PUNISHMENT AND TORTURE. 



How unnecessaiy, how unjust, how cruel, how horrible it is 
to punish men for no other reason than that we have them at our 
mercy and they have in some way offended us ! It must be re- 
membered that criminals are simply and solely those who have done 
what we consider wrong. But they are not in fact a whit worse 
than ourselves, or than people are generally. They have been 
bold enough, or injudicious enough to do what they thought was 
right and what we thought was wrong. That was the sole cause 
of their misfortune and the source of their offending. What is 
worse than all, they happened to be in the minority. 

"We torture and punish people, not in self defence, not to 
protect ourselves, but to make them do as we want them to do, 
and above all to have them adopt our creed and follow our mode 
of action. But are we any better in this respect than they who 
lived in the Middle Ages ? Did they do any worse than we are 
doing every day ? Were they more wicked or more merciless 
than we are? No, all our punishments are pure tortures, and 
the spirit that prompts this persecution is the contemptible and 
villainous spirit that moved those who lived and ruled in Europe 
from the 5th to the 15th centuries. Men want to be masters, 
they want their own way, they want to exercise power, they 
delight in being cruel to their enemies and to unbelievers at all 
times. 

Probably nine-tenths of all the worst crimes — robberies, 
murder and arson especially — go unpunished, because the crim- 
inal is never detected. And still, absurdly enough, people be- 
lieve that we could not get along without punishing crime as we 
do ! If we let nine-tenths of our worst criminals escape, what 
harm would there be if we let the other tenth escape, at least 
with a light punishment ? We might resist evil, but we should 
not punish evil doers in the customary manner. We should not 
contend with. them. 

We hear much about the will of the people. But if it was 
the will of the people, there would be no need of force. There 
would be no demand for an army or police to enforce that will. 
We have government and apply force to secure action that is 
against the will of the people. The "people" always means 
some people, or a few people, and generally they are only a 
favored and aggressive portion of the whole mass of people. 

When will we come to see and realize that criminals are peo- 
ple that are to be pitied, not tortured or despised ? They never 
can lose their right to fair, manly, Christian treatment under 
any circumstances. Why not treat them as if they were insane, 
or misdirected, or perhaps lacking that element of self control 
which other people possess ? Under no circumstances can a man 



PUNISHMENT AND TORTURE. 



183 



justify his own wrongs by the wrongs of his aieighbor or his 
enemy. We are all criminals in one way or another. 

This is the one great doctrine : You cannot change the char- 
acter of an act by any process whatever after it is done. It 
cannot be excused, palliated, justified or compensated for by 
doing some other act, no matter how meritorious. One act has 
nothing to do with another act, and it has no connection with it 
in any manner. No man or set of men can take away the rights 
of another man — no one can deprive him of his manhood or 
citizenship, or of his rights to either of those things. We can 
only repeat what w T e have often said : One man is as good 
as any other man, and he has as many rights and privileges 
under all circumstances. 

Some people imagine that fifty or one hundred rights ought 
to balance at least one wrong ; or if a man has done us a thou- 
sand favors, we ought to be ashamed of being offended if he de- 
cides to do us one mortal injury. But our theory is all wrong in 
this case. One act has no connection with another act, and the 
good done at one time can by no possible contrivance be made to 
balance the evil of another time. If a man is really a friend of 
ours, he would be incapable of doing us a willful injury at any 
time. No matter how much of a friend a man may have been to 
us in the past, he is an enemy of ours if he steps aside to give us 
offence or do us an injury now. It is what a man is to-day that 
concerns us — not what he was yesterday or a year ago. We 
judge only of things as w T e find them at the present time — the 
past is gone forever. It is a very common thing to find that a 
man has been our friend for years, but for some reason unknown 
to ourself , he is our enemy now. In ninety-nine cases out of a 
hundred, it will be found that the cause of his being offended 
was purely a matter of imagination or a misunderstanding on 
his part. Those who ought never to wrong or offend us are 
those who claim to be our friends. 



CHAPTER XXII. 



THE DELUSIVENESS OF POWER. 

Instead of studying the subject of matter and material so 
persistently as we do, we should give more attention to the mind 
and its operations. We should strive to ascertain the nature 
and capabilities of what we call intellect, and above all. we 
should endeavor to determine whether such a thing as mind 
independent of matter really exists. It certainly must be inde- 
pendent if it exists at all. Perhaps we shall find that mind and 
spirits vanish on close inspection, as God vanishes whenever he 
is approached. We find that gods, demons and spirits are pure 
shadows, mere conceptions with which mankind have been 
diverting themselves from time immemorial, but which they are 
now inclined to exchange for something more tangible, more 
substantial and more useful in practical life. 

We have believed in spirits, invisible beings and imponder- 
able fluids for a long period. Let us try at last to find something 
more in accordance with reason and the spirit of the times. We 
know something of the changes and developments of matter, 
but we know practically nothing as yet of the instrumentalities 
through which the mind is affected. Is there any mind outside 
of our own notions? We not only have inadequate and incorrect 
ideas on this subject, but we have actually conjured up forms and 
conceptions that have no substantial foundation on which to rest. 
We have not only magnified and modified certain phenomena, 
we have even introduced new creations of our own. 

For a long time we have supposed that the world was moved 
by God, and that its operations were controlled and directed by 
his power exclusively. We have supposed that an all-wise and 
ever-alert Providence cares for all creatures, and that all things 
which come to pass must happen through divine permission 
alone. What God does not do, or does not permit, it has been 



THE DELUSIVENESS OF POWER. 



185 



believed, cannot be accomplished. No other part has been left 
for man to play in life's drama than one of passive obedience and 
strict inactivity. Another conception that long prevailed was 
this, that everything, every substance, no matter how insignifi- 
cant, was moved by its own spirit, its own agent, its own God. 
But we are glad to notice that sensible men generally are now 
abandoning such unfounded notions as these, and, as we trust, for 
all time. It is now known that matter, like men and animals, 
is endowed with its own power, and that it has no need of any 
supernatural agency nor the assistance of any God. Is there any 
need of mind? Does matter need guidance? No, it has its own 
place and direction, and these it always preserves. 

Throughout the whole range of matter, from the highest and 
most elaborate forms down to the lowest and simplest, one sys- 
tem is seen to prevail, one idea, one uniform character through- 
out. The horse does not differ from man in character or con- 
ception in any essential particular ; the tree does not materially 
differ from the horse, and the crystal, the rock, and inert matter 
of all kinds, does not differ, again, from the tree or plant. Man 
has a higher plane of development, as we view the matter, than 
the rest of creation, and that is the most that can be said in his 
behalf. Man. indeed, thinks and reasons, and in a manner he 
creates new forms, or rather he makes new combinations. And 
the horse also thinks, but only as the child thinks, always in the 
simplest and most primitive manner. Even the plant ' perceives 
and feels ; and if we keep that fact well in view, we are forced 
to conclude that the plant also has reason, though of course it is 
reason in its incipient stages. The plant, like man and animals, 
has its likes and dislikes. It covets the light ; it grasps for sup- 
port and clings persistently to some more substantial form. It 
selects its food, choosing what is pleasing and rejecting what is 
not, precisely as animals do. Why shall we say that the plant 
does not reason ? And does not the crystal, in its growth and 
progressive formation, choose and reject according to its appar- 
e nt preference ? Does it not proceed in its development in a 
regular, uniform and systematic manner? Why shall we con- 
cede that the animal has mind, a soul, while to the crystal and 
the rock this gift is denied ? There is no good reason for any 
such distinction. 



Eventually a radical change must be introduced into all our 
ideas of power — and particularly in that very common concep- 
tion prevailing among men that one thing has an actual in- 



188 



THE DELUSIVENESS OF POWER. 



fluence upon some other thing and that it possesses in its charac- 
ter some mysterious principle of control. It is evident that there 
is, and there can be in nature, no such irresistible power. Simply 
because a certain result follows, or a certain phenomenon is 
observed, we are not justified in the conclusion that some power 
has been exerted and some effect produced. The appearance 
that we notice may be an incident, or a mere coincidence. If 
two men appear at a certain place at a certain time, we are not 
permitted to infer as a matter of course that one has compelled 
the other or even that they have met by appointment. People 
may be riding in the same boat or car in the same direction, and 
perhaps towards the same objective point, without even know- 
ing each other or having any relations of any kind, or without 
any suspicion that influence has been exerted in any way. 
That a man rises or departs when another appears is no proof 
in itself of anything like either compulsion or repulsion. And 
so again that iron filings follow the magnet, or appear excited 
when it is brought near, is no proof that the magnet exerts upon 
them some strange and unknown power. A man may obey a 
law, and still afford no evidence that the law exerts any power 
over his movements. We know indeed that no law has any 
power. That a man takes a medicine and gets well is absolutely 
no proof of the virtue or remedial power of the medicine. Some 
men take medicine and die, and many men get well and never 
consult a doctor. That a body falls to the earth is no proof of 
itself of the earth's attraction. We know that as a matter of 
fact the earth does not attract bodies. Some things are incap- 
able of proof, and the earth's attraction is one of them. If the 
magnet were so powerful as to attract bodies, it would attract all 
bodies, wood and stone, for example. That the magnet attracts 
iron in particular shows that the power depends as much upon 
the nature of the iron as it does upon the magnet. It is like so 
many other cases where power is supposed to be exerted and yet 
the undertaking fails because the conditions are not favorable, 
proving that it all depends upon circumstances, and that power 
alone is insufficient. In all cases where power is supposed to be 
exerted, the nature of the object acted upon has more to do with 
the success of the performance than has the power itself. Nobody 
can do tilings that are impossible. Even Christ, the son of God, 
could do no mighty work in certain localities. In order that a 
man may do miracles, the first condition to be met is that the 
people must believe that miracles can be done. That a person 
follows an order given, is proof only that he chooses or decides 
to obey. It is really the nature of the object itself that leads to 
its moving. Every object, for all practical purposes, has will — 



THE DELUSIVENESS OF POWER. 



187 



all matter lias will. A ball rolls, but a box does not. An apple 
falls, but a toy balloon rises. A boat floats, but a stone sinks. 
Everything follows its own impulses, the tendencies of its own 
nature, and it is never governed in its course by the nature, 
impulses or power of any other object. Nobody, nothing, is 
compelled or influenced. In hypnotism, the effect depends not 
upon the operator and his power, but upon the state or tenden- 
cies of the subject. If the subject be a good one. he succeeds : 
but if the subject prove not to be susceptible, then the experi- 
ment results in failure. The power of the operator must remain 
the same in all cases, and yet sometimes he succeeds and some- 
times he fails, proving that his power alone is not sufficient. 
In fact, results demonstrate that he has no such power as he pre- 
tends to possess. The success always depends upon the subject 
and not upon the operator. The power of the hypnotist lies 
simply in suggestion — the subject follows a suggestion and yields 
to manipulation. 

The more light we gain on the subject, the more clearly it is 
seen that we must change our whole creed in relation to what 
this or that person achieves or what this or that power accom- 
plishes. It is evident enough that nobody attains any object by 
his own exertion independently of all other agencies. Every- 
thing is blocked in like the boulder in the glacier, and it never 
moves except as the mass moves. It has no independent move- 
ment of its own and it always maintains the same relative posi- 
tion to the bodies in its vicinity. 

To know what power, even what supreme power is able to 
accomplish, consider the career of our God. and especially that 
of the pagan gods of former ages. How far did their power ex- 
tend? Was it unlimited? No, it was always conditional. They 
were easily thwarted. Their success, quite as well as that of 
men. depended largely upon circumstances. Even great Jupiter 
was far from accomplishing all that he undertook. He was al- 
ways in trouble and things often went contrary to his wishes — 
sometimes with Juno, his wife, sometimes with his children and 
sometimes with the other gods. And how was it with Jehovah? 
He commanded, but he was not always obeyed. He had no 
cause for contention with his wife, for fortunately he had none, 
but he had any amount of conflict with his disobedient and re- 
bellious children. The Devil was always interfering with his 
plans, and it often happened that the latter came off victorious. 
God gave our first parents their commands, but how did that 
affair terminate ? To punish Avas the extent of God's power : to 
enforce his demands, was found to be quite beyond the range of 
possibility. He could bribe or threaten, but when such means 



188 



THE DELUSIVENESS OF POWER. 



failed, he was absolutely powerless. Beyond doubt all the 
omnipotence and omniscience of gods lie in the minds of men. 

Men have the same power that gods have — no more and no 
less. They can reward and punish, they can frighten and 
cajole, and when such means are insufficient, they are painfully 
helpless. People who are really powerful should have every- 
thing to their own liking, but no such people have ever yet been 
discovered. As we have already noticed, even gods have their 
troubles and disappointments like feeble mortals. 

What is an emperor? The feeblest, most helpless of beings ! 
He can accomplish nothing without the help of others. He must 
have an army, he must have courtiers, servants and a crown, 
all of which come from the people. Like all else that we find in 
this world, he is nothing but a phenomenon, a mere fleeting 
show. Of himself he is nothing. The lowest rascal can assassi- 
nate him whenever he finds an opportunity. Talk about the 
king's power and possessions ! Why, even the clothes he wears 
are bought with the money of other people. He depends upon 
his subjects even for the food that he eats. He holds his crown 
by permission of the people, and his life is always at their dis- 
posal. He does not work himself, and hence, individually, he 
accomplishes nothing. In this world everything depends upon 
something, in some way. Capital depends upon labor, and labor 
upon capital. How powerful was Goliah? Little David slew 
him with a pebble and the help of a sling. A pigmy skilled in 
the use of poison can quickly remove the most powerful monarch 
on earth. Talk about strength ! It is vanity, a pure delusion. 
Strength of numbers ! How readily was Napoleon overthrown 
with his six hundred thousand men ! And how was it with 
Xerxes ? The rich become poor and the poor rich. Where is 
the difference? If a man were really powerful of his own might, 
his strength could never be taken from him, and yet we know 
that there is nothing so evanescent as riches and power. Noth- 
ing is more ephemeral. What is it that beings possess of which 
they can never be deprived? Men can lose that only which 
never properly belonged to them. A man who is strong in his 
own might never becomes weak. But no such men have ever 
yet been known. 

It must not be forgotten that in all teaching, all cases of 
representation and in all communication by words, signs or illus- 
trations, we never get more than an approximation to the ideas 
of the teacher. We never see things as he sees them and we 
never understand them as he intended. When we talk about a 
house, we have one picture or image in our mind, and the learner 
has in his mind a picture or image which is different. We can- 



THE DELUSIVENESS OF POWER. 



189 



not communicate new or unknown ideas ; neither can we intro- 
duce new notions or remodel old ones. How could we describe 
to a man something that he had never seen and of which he 
knew nothing ? We would simply say it was undescribable, un- 
less we could point to something which it resembled. 

Again, we ask what is power ? Where shall we find its true 
exemplification ? We speak of the power of proof, the power of 
speech, the power of music, the power of eloquence. But is 
there any such power that we could rely upon at all times and 
upon all occasions ? The power of speech and music is like the 
power of medicine. Sometimes it seems to be effective and at 
other times it proves an absolute failure. Some people are af- 
fected by music and some by eloquence, and some again are 
impressed at one time and not at another. But if medicine or 
music or eloquence has the power that is claimed, it should ex- 
hibit that power at all times and not fail in a single instance. 
However, there is no such medicine, and there is no such music 
or eloquence. And so it is with the power of light, the power of 
justice, or power of any kind. Light and justice evidently have 
no power inherent in themselves. What is justice for one man 
is not considered justice by another ; and so it is in the case of 
evidence which is supposed to amount to proof. Evidence that 
makes a strong impression upon some people is entirely without 
effect upon others. It all depends upon the subject or person 
himself, his inclinations and his susceptibilities. 

The great question, and one that is not readily answered, 
is this: How are men moved, how are they compelled? Are 
they really moved or are they compelled ? How are they in- 
duced to act ? One thing is certain : Z\Ien never submit to out- 
side control, and no one can properly be held responsible for the 
acts of other people. What men do is done of their own free 
will, and never under any other conditions. People always do 
what they prefer to do, choose to do, wish to do. Power over 
men, and even over things, is an expression that should become 
obsolete. We are not even taught — we learn, and this we do 
by growing. If we did not grow, we should not learn, no matter 
what influences might be supposed to be operating in our favor. 
No man can even help us in any way, no man can do for us what 
we should have done for ourselves. Xobody can take our place 
and do our work. Xo man can do our thinking. Vicarious 
service of any kind, for us, is of no avail. What some one else 
does we do not do, nor is it possible that it should aid us in any 
manner. If a man helps us lift a piece of timber, as we say, 
what he really does is to lift one part of the timber while we lift 
another, and his work is entirely independent of our work. 



190 



THE DELUSIVENESS OF POWER! 



It is clear that every man controls his own will absolutely, 
and what he does is of his own volition. People enslave them- 
selves, they are never enslaved by others. To control men. their 
will must be reached, and that is impossible under any circum- 
stances. The most important question in this connection is this : 
How far are men subject to that mysterious agency known as 
hypnotic influence ? There is something in such an agency, 
though for the present we are compelled to confess that we know 
little of its capabilities and still less of its true value. The au- 
thor still maintains that there is no such thing as compulsion, 
as the term is commonly understood, but he is ready to grant 
that there is much in the influence of suggestion. There is no 
doubt that we encounter hypnotic influences in everything 
around us. There is for us expression and suggestion, and even 
temptation, in all that we see and hear. We are continually 
impressed by this act or that act. this word or that word. We 
are indeed, as has been so often remarked, creatures of imitation, 
and we are constantly influenced by what we hear others say 
and what we see others do. The influence of suggestion is 
wonderful indeed. Men and women imitate, children imitate, 
and even the lower animals imitate. We not only gape when 
we see others gape, but we stop and stare when we see others 
stare. It is to this contagious principle that we must trace the 
wild and unreasoning action, at times, of men in crowds and 
animals in herds. The tendency is for each individual to do 
what he sees those around him do and to believe what he ob- 
serves that others believe. There is no question at all that men 
are influenced by their surroundings, not through any power 
actually exerted upon them, but through the important principle 
•of suggestion — or. if another term is preferred, through hypno- 
tism. Even the subject in the state submits cheerfully because 
of the fact that he is practically hypnotized. The splendor of 
the court dazzles his eyes, and the power of the army strikes 
terror to his soul. There is not the slightest sign of compulsion 
in this instance — it is a pure case of hypnotism. He might de- 
cline to observe and he might refuse to obey, but he is transfixed, 
and through fear and reverence, two most unworthy feelings for 
men. he falls down and worships his lord and master. In re- 
ligious matters he acts in precisely the same manner because he 
submits to the same influences. 

There is another way of demonstrating the impossibility of 
any such agency as power over others. There is no possible 
means by which power over sentient beings could be maintained. 
There is no way by which we may reach the will of others, but 
it is known that it is the will alone that controls action and de- 



THE DELUSIVENESS OF POWER. 



191 



terinines conduct. Intelligent beings observe and feel, and what 
they perceive and feel alone affects their decision and resolution. 
In this manner men are influenced, and in no other. There is, 
it is well known, no possible way by which we can compel peo- 
ple to think, talk, or believe, or indeed to do anything that we 
happen to desire. Our whole power seems to be confined to the 
causing of trouble or inflicting pain — in other words to punish- 
ment, which is a poor compensation for what we may have en- 
deavored to do, but failed to accomplish. 

So far we have been considering the power of men over men, 
of creatures with thought and feeling over other beings also pos- 
sessed of thought and feeling. Now we come to the question of 
the power which beings of intelligence are supposed to exert 
over inert and inanimate matter. Is there any such power as 
that which men are believed to exert upon things ? What in- 
fluence does mind have over matter? Does it have any influence 
whatever? The answer to that question will develop as the 
discussion proceeds. Intelligence or mind has control over 
matter or substance only so far as matter is influenced or com- 
pelled in its moA T ements by the will or spirit of some living be- 
ing. And where do we find an exemplification of any such 
influence? As a matter of fact will has no influence upon matter. 
Matter never obeys commands ; matter has neither feeling nor 
intelligence, and hence it cannot receive commands. What in- 
fluence could the most powerful man exert upon a stone for 
instance ? A stone never does anything, if for no other reason 
because it is destitute of feeling and intelligence and therefore 
it has no will. A man might take up a stone and carry it any 
distance, and still the stone would be as passive and inert as if it 
were still lying in the quarry from which it was originally taken. 
In this case the stone has done absolutely nothing, and therefore 
it could not have been influenced by any outside power. If we 
could compel the trees to dance, the rocks to sing or the waters 
to laugh, we might indeed boast of the miraculous power which 
w^e possessed. But unfortunately there are no such instances on 
record. We can cast a stone with a sling or hurl it with our 
hand, but the effort is wmolly and solely ours. It is our will that 
causes the movement, and the stone ceases to move from the 
moment when the force which projected it has been expended. 
How shall we say that we have compelled the stone to do any- 
thing? It is not in our power to change the character of the 
stone in any way, nor even to determine its career or fate. We 
can transport it, but it remains the same stone as before. We 
can even crush it, and yet w T e have not destroyed it. Shall we 
say the stone has disappeared simply because it has crumbled ? 



192 



THE DELUSIVENESS OF POWER. 



We have seen that mind, intelligence, will, cannot affect 
matter, and now comes up this question : Can matter affect the 
mind or will, or can it exert any power over other matter ? We 
find no evidence that any such influence exists. Power at all 
times implies not only effort but direction also. There can be no 
power but conscious power which has some well defined object 
of its own in view. Power that depends upon accident or chance 
has none of the characteristics of real power. Power is manifested 
by the things which beings do and by what they accomplish. 
Inanimate matter, a log for instance, has no will, no intelligence, 
no purpose, and therefore it never can be said to effect or accom- 
plish any result. It is absolutely destitute of power, and when 
it moves, it does so only so far as some other body moves with 
which it happens to be associated or connected. We are con- 
tinually talking about the power of things, of the sun for ex- 
ample. But what does the sun do for ourselves, or for other 
objects? Does the sun have us in view at any time? Does it 
seek to warm us. or burn us. or affect us in any manner ? Prob- 
ably not. Does the sun make any exertion to warm the earth ? 
No body can exert power unless it makes an effort and experi- 
ences fatigue. It must also have purpose or design. It certainly 
must be that the sun possesses no power, or at least that it never 
attempts to exert any power over other bodies. We talk also 
about the power of God. most omnipotent of all beings. But 
what can God do ? Only what is possible or natural, or in other 
words, only what has been done already. God could not make 
the rocks weep, nor could he change the character of the most 
simple of earth's productions. God may have done miracles in 
the remote past, but he does no miracles at present. He seems 
to have lost that gift, if he ever possessed it. 

There is one case of apparent power of one body over an- 
other that we do not understand, and which therefore we cannot 
explain, and that is the case of the magnet, with all the phenom- 
ena that belong in that connection. It is believed that the 
magnet attracts iron, but does it really do so? That has not yet 
been demonstrated. To repeat what we have already said in this 
connection : That one body meets another, is no proof that it 
has been attracted. Bodies often meet from other causes and 
under other conditions. There are plenty of cases, as we have 
said, where bodies meet, and there is no suspicion of attraction. 
They meet at times by accident, at times by force or impulsion, 
at times through will or desire. If the magnet had any drawing 
power, it would draw all bodies, certainly all metals. But it 
only acts in certain exceptional cases and the meeting of the 
iron and the magnet results as much from the nature of the 



12 



THE DELUSIVENESS OF POWER. 



103 



former as from the power of the latter. We could with as much 
propriety say that the iron seeks the magnet as that it is at- 
tracted by the magnet. 

And really, if there is any such thing as power, as has long 
been talked about, it must lie chiefly in the resistance which 
comes from inert matter. It is well known that there can be 
no action without reaction and no effort or exertion without 
there being something that resists. What could the strongest of 
men do if there were not something to be done ? No one can 
conquer w^orlcls unless there are worlds to conquer. If we want 
to neutralize power, we must remove resistance. Nobody can 
fight unless he finds somebody to oppose him. If everybody 
obeyed the laws, there would be nothing for the state to do ; and 
in fact the state has a direct interest in developing resistance 
and revolution. What is the sense of keeping a police and a 
standing army, if there is not something with which to occupy 
their attention '? If we did not confine steam, it would be per- 
fectly harmless ; and even dynamite of itself need Dot give us any 
concern, if we simply keep out of its way and leave it alone. 
It is not gunpowder that does the damage, it is the explosion. 
If the tornado met with no resistance, nobody would be injured. 
The tornado makes a disturbance and demolishes things only 
when it fails to have the whole world to itself and meets with 
serious opposition. If a gas burns slowly in a stove and we make 
room for it, we experience no trouble. It is only when a large 
quantity is ignited in an instant that disaster results. For an 
instant, air or water affords as much resistance as would be 
found in an iron barrier or a solid stone wall, but when a little 
time is allowed, the air or water yields readily, while the iron 
barrier does not. It is a mistake to suppose there is any inherent 
power in inert matter. There certainly is none in such agents 
as gas, steam or gunpowder, which are usually supposed to be 
remarkably dangerous. Chemicals have no power until they are 
destroyed or transmuted, by combustion or otherwise. 

It must be remembered that strength or power is a very un- 
certain and variable quantity. A man who is strong at one time 
or in one case, is weak in another. Everything depends upon the 
advantages that a man has to favor him in his undertaking. A 
man with the help of a harness has more strength than he has 
without a harness. A pound will balance a pound only on one 
condition, namely, that the fulcrum should be at the middle of 
the beam. Every man who has handled scales knows that he 
can so adjust the beam that one pound will weigh ten pounds. 
Archimides was undoubtedly correct when he remarked that if 
he had a lever long enough and a prop solid enough, he could 



194 



THE DELUSIVENESS OF POWER. 



lift the world. Again, we repeat, nothing is so variable, so un- 
certain and so evanescent as power, and under no circumstances 
would a sensible man boast of his strength or of his superior 
advantages. A man's strength is never his own, and that is 
true of a man's advantages. 

Power can be effective only when it produces something 
new, something that did not exist before. But where do we find 
an exemplification of such an agency? We can do, really, only 
what is already done ; we can create or produce only what al- 
ways existed. If God created the world, it must have been a 
world before he created it. If a man builds a house, he creates 
nothing, not a single particle that did not exist before — and 
when completed, it is merely a new combination of old material, 
corresponding to a plan in the mind of the architect formed be- 
fore the work began. If a piece of rock is cleft, or a piece of 
wood is rent, a seam or cleft is followed in each case that existed 
before the rent was made. The separation is made wider than 
before — nothing more. Again, we must say, we never do any- 
thing that was not done before. No operation can develop new 
individuals. They must have existed from eternity. If a piece 
of plate glass breaks or cracks, the fracture always follows lines 
that must have existed from the beginning, though perhaps they 
were not visible. 

Another illustration in this connection is found in the case 
of figures. Take a case of multiplication. We put down five 
and then six under it, we draw a line, and say the product is 
thirty! What have we developed that is new? Has not five 
times six always been thirty? What have we done to the five, 
or what have we done with the six ? Absolutely nothing. The 
whole operation is in our mind. We say we make things in 
construction. But we never do. We merely combine. 

But before concluding this article, there is one aspect of 
power that deserves at least a passing notice. Man is more 
powerful after all than he suspects. He is too modest altogether 
— he yields too much credit to God and the state, as the givers 
of all good gifts and the doers of all great deeds. It is not God 
but men that are the creators of this world. If it were not for 
men, there would be, there could be, no God, no world, no crea- 
tion. Nothing could exist independent of man. Things are only 
as man sees them, and if he were not here to see them, they would 
have no existence. A picture exists solely on condition that 
there is some one to make a picture in the first place, and some 
one to view and appreciate the picture afterward. The whole 
world, and God with it, is a vision ; it is merely man's conception 
of things. The scene changes as man changes ; as his percep- 
tions change, his ideas change. 



THE DELUSIVENESS OF POWER. 



195 



Notice what a career God himself has had ! After being 
recognized for centuries as the Supreme Ruler of the Universe, 
omnipotent, omniscient and omnipresent, he has now reached 
a point, at the beginning of the twentieth century, when he is 
stripped of all the insignia of power, and even his very existence 
is denied ! Where would God be if there were no men in the 
world ? He would be nowhere and even his existence would be 
ignored. Nobody would know anything of his character and 
history. Nobody would speak of him, for there would be noth- 
ing to be said. What could God do, when there was nothing to 
be done? — nobody to punish, nobody to threaten, nobody to rec- 
ompense and none to save ? It would be a sad day indeed for 
the Almighty if men should be swept from the earth in a body ! 
There would be some animals left of course, but animals know 
no God and therefore they worship none. What would God be 
if there were none to worship him ? What would a king be if he 
had no subjects ? He would not be a king most certainly. 

Man is everything — he is the world itself. There is, there 
can be, no world outside of man. Great men are not strong ; kings 
and conquerors are not. No, not they. The feeblest and most in- 
significant of mortals are true sovereigns. They are the makers 
of kings and queens and conquerors. The subject himself is the 
real king, for the king could not exist for a moment without 
subjects. Men were in this world thousands of years before 
kings came — and even God and the state are comparatively late 
discoveries. What a blessed thing it would have been for this 
world if they had been overlooked entirely ! 

And this is the conclusion, the corollary, that must follow 
what has thus far been said on this subject : If there is no such 
thing as power, there can be no results of power, no cause and 
effect. Things do not come, they are not caused ; they are, and 
they always have been. We say a man would have died if he 
had not taken the medicine. How should we ever ascertain that 
fact? He did take the medicine and he recovered — that is all. 
There is no " if" about the matter. The power of medicine can 
never be learned. The idea of cause and effect always involves 
absurdities. Causes must always precede effects, and effects 
must follow causes. And yet a cause is not a cause till it has 
produced an effect. 

But we are constantly hearing people tell of what this thing 
has done and that man has accomplished, as if men or things 
alone were capable of achieving something ! There never has 
been such a case known in all history, we venture to say, and 
to make such assertions is nonsense in the sublimated form. 



CHAPTER XXIII. 



WRITTEN LAWS. 



Written law in its best form is merely an expression of 
somebody's wishes or opinions, something supposed to be endorsed 
by the majority of the people at the time of its publication. 
Such laws originally came out in the form of decrees from the 
king, or his minister, or. as in Rome, from the praetor. There 
is no essential difference between a written law, a decree and 
an ordinance. They are all equally arbitrary rules established 
with a view to meeting some emergency or carrying out some 
proposed plan. Laws are not made to enunciate principles, 
since nothing is added to principles by enunciating them. They 
do not need enunciating. Laws have absolutely nothing to do 
with principles. They are merely formed and contrived by the 
ruling power at the time ( often a mere party boss ) to carry out 
some scheme that he has concocted. It cannot be too well borne 
in mind that laws are this and nothing more. It is rare that 
they are intended for the good of the people ; as a rule their 
effect is to benefit a few of the people at the expense of the re- 
mainder. Sometimes laws indicate the prevailing opinion, the 
fashion, the mode of the day. Many laws are endorsed by the 
masses, without much reflection, simply because they are laws, and 
not because they are believed to be right. Some people imagine 
that after a law is enacted all that remains for the public is to 
obey it. But that is a mistake, a misapprehension. There is 
nothing peculiar about a written law ; it is no better than any 
other piece of writing. It merely indicates, as we have said, 
somebody's wishes or opinions. No doubt the successor in office 
will have different wishes and different opinions, and therefore 
he will issue a different ordinance. Thus it goes. 

Law is a matter of men. The laws of Rome were not made 



WRITTEN LAWS. 



197 



by the people in fact, but by the praetor, the emperor, the one 
who for the time being was at the head of affairs. All laws are 
practically edicts or decrees, and no law can be anything more. 
Edicts are always from one man — sometimes Ceesar, sometimes 
Charlemagne, sometimes Napoleon, and sometimes Tom Piatt. 
No, law is really one of the simplest things in the world. 

It is a mistake to suppose that men are governed in their 
actions by laws. In the first place laws apply to only a small 
portion of the affairs of life. Again, only a few people — the 
poor, the weak, the unsophisticated — have any desire or purpose 
to obey laws. Many people do not know what the laws are, and 
others do not care. Most people do as they please irrespective of 
law, and they are willing to take their chances in the case as 
they happen to come. As a matter of fact not one man in a 
thousand pretends to obey the laws in all cases. Must a man 
consult the statute books and the court decisions before he conies 
to a conclusion as to what step he had better take? No sensible 
man thinks of going to that trouble. If he did consult the books 
and the lawyers, he would probably not be much wiser. If he 
risks a lawsuit, he even then does not ascertain what the law is. 
He merely learns who beats and how much it costs to obtain 
what is denominated " justice." 

"What are laws for? Simply to frighten people or punish 
them ; or in some way to get some people to do what other peo- 
ple want them to do. Laws really settle nothing — they are mere 
instruments in the hands of ambitious, selfish and unscrupulous 
men. They are supposed to protect people. But only to a 
limited extent do they do so. They favor some and oppress 
others. When some one succeeds in a lawsuit, there is always 
some one who fails. What is one man's gain is another man's 
loss, in law as well as in war. Laws, at least at the present day, 
do not determine what is right or just. They have nothing to do 
with right, except to give what is wrong a semblance of right 
for the time being. It is well known to everybody that right is 
one tiling, even according to the opinions of the masses, and the 
law as made by our masters is something quite different. 

The government justifies itself by pretending to go accord- 
ing to law in all cases. That it can well afford to do, for it 
makes the laws as it wants them in the first place. With the 
public the case is quite different, for they have absolutely noth- 
ing to say about making laws. They send representatives, it is 
true, but as a rule these representatives do not represent their 
constituents but themselves. The government not only makes 
its own laws, but executes them, and that is a very important 
matter. In fact the whole operation of the law depends upon 



198 



WRITTEN LAWS. 



how and in what spirit it is executed. Here the government has 
everything in its own hands. It can nullify or ignore a law, or so 
modify it as to give it ten times the force it was intended to have. 
In executing a law the officers follow chiefly their own wills, as 
everything is left to their discretion or desires. How far is a 
policeman controlled by law in his treatment of a prisoner ? He 
makes his own laws to fit his own inclinations and he acts ac- 
cordingly. The work of legislators, courts and court officers, as 
well as all executive officers, is almost wholly independent of 
law. They consult the boss, and care little about the law. 

It is well known that in practice written laws are compara- 
tively valueless, so far as controlling the conduct of men is con- 
cerned. We have laws against crimes in abundance, and still 
crimes go on increasing to an alarming extent. As the people 
do not make the laws, and as they have little interest in seeing 
them enforced, they give them very little attention. People 
obey the law only when they are watched, especially if it is ob- 
noxious. But it is possible to watch only a few people, and so 
as a rule men do as they please regardless of law. Laws should 
be so shaped and so worded that they have the approval of the 
people, and then there would _ be no need of watching them. 
The only government, as we have often said, that is at all effica- 
cious and satisfactory is self-government. 

As a matter of right, there should be no rules or laws. Laws 
can never apply justly in two cases, for no two cases are alike. 
It is clear that a law which applies in one case cannot without 
change be made to apply justly in a different case. Rules of all 
kinds hamper, embarrass, and obstruct the action of men. Ac- 
tions at all times should be governed not by arbitrary rules, but 
by reason and judgment. Let people be free to act as seems to 
them fit and proper, according to the circumstances of each par- 
ticular case. In the East everything follows rules, custom, prec- 
edent. If a man paints, he must paint in a certain manner, and 
if he carves he must follow rules, even though he knows they 
spoil the figure. To a mosque there must be so many domes and 
no more. Such rules fetter genius and result in no good what- 
ever. It is time to banish conventionalism, and let the human 
soul be free once more. 

In practice, how do laws operate ? Do they relieve or pro- 
tect the people ? A law that assumes to protect everybody pro- 
tects nobody. Universal protection is, like universal love, a 
myth. In practice a few get protection and favors, while the 
majority are neglected and are left to endure their sufferings as 
best they can. How was it with the coal strike of 1902 ? Did the 
laws in that case protect the people? No, the laws in that 



WRITTEN LAWS. 



199 



case protected the operators quite a little, and the miners 
also to a certain extent ; but the people were compelled to bear 
the whole burden and take care of themselves. That is the 
kind of protection that law is always sure to afford. Somebody 
must suffer grievously in every case ; somebody must get along 
without protection. Protection, like riches and luxuries of all 
kinds, is for the few — always for the few. 

Strange laws are laid down for us in some cases. We must 
not only obey our masters, but we must love them. That is 
really a very hard condition ! To love those who hate us, who 
oppress us, and who do us continued injustice — that is one case 
which the law cannot reach. We may be commanded, but we 
cannot love our masters, at least not such masters as we have at 
the present day. Shall we love a parent that treats us with 
great harshness and injustice ! Shall we love him who con- 
demns us to an eternity in hell, simply because in our ignorance 
we may have done what did not please our master? No, we 
could not love such a master, even though he were God himself. 

A man in civilized life is supposed to obey the laws. But 
he never knows the laws — at least he never knows more than a 
few of them. Laws are made much faster than people can read 
them — to say nothing of committing them to memory. A man 
seldom is aware that he has disobeyed the law till he finds that 
he has incurred a penalty. And yet every man is supposed to 
know the law ! What a farce and what a fraud ! Lawyers and 
judges are excused for not knowing the law, but the common 
people never ! Isn't that strange ? 

Laws are not enacted and published with a view to having 
them read or understood. No laws, not even those contained in 
the Bible, are made for that purpose. Laws as a rule are made 
to mystify the facts and leave the people in doubt. They mean 
anything or nothing, and they are to be observed or not observed 
according to circumstances. All laws, like all religions, are mys- 
teries, and they were originally intended to be such. The turn 
which these laws are made to take when they are applied to the 
affairs of men, depends entirely upon the interpreter, the judge, 
the one who is supposed to be in authority for the time being. 
Laws, as everybody knows, are not devised to tell people what to 
do or what to leave undone, but to give a man's enemies an op- 
portunity or an excuse for persecuting or tormenting him. They 
are always mysterious in their form of expression, and they can 
be read any way that a person likes, either backward or forward. 
Laws are generally excuses or expedients permitting the wicked 
to perpetrate their crimes and escape without injury. Laws are 
always vague and incomprehensible. They are in effect tricks or 



200 WRITTEN LAWS. 

schemes devised for the purpose of deceiving or overreaching the 
common people. 

People as a matter of fact always do as they please without 
any reference to law, and they take the consequences as they 
happen to come. Sometimes they are punished for their wrong 
doing, and sometimes they are not molested ; and even when 
they are punished they consider that their gains equal their 
losses. The Bible is full of laws, and our statute books are also 
full of laws, but what effect do they have ? Who obeys them ? 
Those who choose to obey them, and not others. There is no 
more compulsion about a man's obeying a statute law than there 
is about obeying a moral law. People always do about such 
matters as they feel or as they are inclined. It is men, not law, 
that interfere with people and cause them trouble — it is the con- 
stables, the sheriff, the police, the executioner who make all the 
disturbance. And even they do as they choose. Their action is 
governed not by law but by their own wills in all cases. No, 
people should at once get rid of the absurd notion that because a 
law has been enacted it must and will be obeyed. 

There is no question but that the greatest good that could 
happen to this or any other civilized country would be the ab- 
rogation or repeal of every written law now found on its statute 
books. It is a serious mistake to suppose that men must be 
governed by written formulas or precepts, or that they are so 
governed now. Men are governed in their actions by the feelings 
and opinions of the people among whom they live. Public 
opinion makes laws ; it also unmakes them. A law against the 
feelings of the large portion of a community cannot be enforced. 
This is the reason why so many laws are enacted and so few en- 
forced. No, men can be and should be allowed to govern them- 
selves without laws and without restraint from any source. We 
do not even need the laws laid down in the Bible. Already we 
have nullified nearly all of those ordinances to a greater or less 
extent. 

The strongest of all laws is community law. Such laws are 
obeyed because they are approved. They come from the people 
and speak the sentiments of the people, — such as the laws of 
fashion, laws of morality, laws of honor. No one cares to defy 
or offend the community in which he lives. It is not so with 
written or statute laws. In such laws the people have no great 
interest ; they are not of their making, they themselves have not 
been consulted, and generally these laws are against their wishes 
and sentiments. How should they have any concern in the en- 
forcement of such laws as these ? 

At present law is used principally as an engine to promote 



THE POLICY OF GOVERNMENT. 



201 



rascality. Highwaymen hold up the unsuspecting traveler with 
a pistol in hand. In a similar way lawyers hold up innocent 
victims by threats of a lawsuit — blackmail as it is sometimes 
called. The woods are full of blackmailers. 

Security to society through the law ! That is very vague in- 
deed. How shall we decide what is security for society, or when 
it is fully secured and when it is not ? No two men agree on this 
question — in these cases the strongest decides as usual. But 
most men want no security, or they would rather get it in some 
less expensive way than through the medium of state authority. 

No, laws are made for an entirely different object than the 
security of society. Society, if secured, must always secure 
itself — neither the law nor the government can do anything 
effective in that direction. The government can make trouble 
and add to the burdens of individuals, but really it can do noth- 
ing beyond that. 



CHAPTER XXIV. 

THE POLICY OF GOVERNMENT. 

How did government by men ever originate, and how did 
it finally grow into a custom ? Things were not always so ; 
they are not necessarily so to-day. The only government that 
men need, or that they can make use of, is self-government. 
We have government because some men want to live at the ex- 
pense of others ; they want to cast their burdens upon the 
shoulders of weaker people. Thus it has been always. The 
desire of some men to rule others is the cause, but fear on the 
part of the weak is the instrument through which success in this 
direction is rendered possible. Men surrender to others for pro- 
tection ; they feel feeble and timid and they are willing to put 
themselves wholly into the power of some new party in order to 
escape the danger of falling into the hands of another party 
which they dread more. But in nine cases out of ten they do 
not better their condition in the least. Men originally con- 
gregated in towns and cities solely because they were afraid ; 
and in cities may be found the chief cause of the fall of man as a 
free citizen. Through cities the world has been enslaved. If we 
had had no cities, we should have had no nation, no govern- 
ment as we have to-day. In cities the power of the nation 



202 



THE POLICY OF GOVERNMENT. 



is concentrated. It is well known that Paris is France, London 
is England, Berlin is Germany and St. Petersburg is Russia, 
Without Rome, the city of Rome, the Roman empire could never 
have existed. 

What a farce it is to speak of such a thing as self-govern- 
ment, as if there were anything of the kind to be found any- 
where ! Does a republic furnish us with an example of people 
who govern themselves *? Most assuredly not. There can be no 
such thing as self-government. A man either has or has not 
masters. If he has masters, he is not self -governed : and if he 
has no masters, he is not governed at all. What gives rise to the 
delusion that people in republics are self -governed is the fact 
that they are supposed to choose their own rulers. But a man 
is none the less our sovereign, and we are none the less governed 
because we have had a choice between masters. People in re- 
publics are supposed to make their own laws, but this is un- 
questionably a fiction. As a matter of fact the masses have 
nothing to do with making laws in any country. Finally, there 
is just as much government, in practice, in a democracy as there 
is under a monarchy, and often there is more. 

All government is. in practice, legalized robbery In its most 
unmistakable form. The conception that government is for the 
people is a childish delusion that will not bear close inspection 
for one moment. Government is for those who are on the inside, 
and for those only. Every man who takes the trouble to obtain 
an office, does so simply with a view to secure what he imagines 
there is in it. There was a time when officers and representa- 
tives were chosen by the people, but that is a practice that was 
long since discontinued. The practice as it exists now is for a 
man first to contrive in some way to have himself nominated 
and then trust to money and good fortune to bring about his 
election. As soon as he is in power, he devotes all his efforts 
toward rendering that power continuous. If he is elected for 
this year, he wants to remain in his position nexr year and the 
year after. That is the chief mission of every man who is chosen 
to represent the people in any capacity. The first effort of the 
highwayman when he overpowers his victim is to bind and gag 
him. so as to render him powerless. Does not the state bind and 
gag its victims in a very similar manner? Is that not the main 
purpose of the laws in the first place : Is the citizen ever allowed 
to defend himself against his government ? Most assuredly not. 
Resistance against the state is rebellion, and sometimes it is 
treason. Great care is taken that no citizen shall have at his 
command the means of defending himself against the govern- 
ment, even if he were so disposed. 



THE POLICY OF GOVERNMENT. 



203 



Those who doubt that the main business of the officers of the 
government is robbing the people, cannot have a true under- 
standing of what a modern state is. What is robbery but taking 
the money from a defenceless victim by force ? And how is money 
ever extorted from the people in the form .of taxes except by a 
show of force? How many people would pay the taxes imposed 
upon them if there were no jails or prisons and no military force 
at command ? No man pays taxes because he believes it is just 
to do so, or because he loves that kind of amusement. He pays 
because he feels that he must. Who wishes to pay taxes that 
others have unnecessarily imposed upon him '? Who wants to 
pay bills that benefit other people and bring harm to himself ? 
How many people derive any appreciable benefit from the taxes 
that they are compelled to pay annually? How many of them 
are consulted as to the amount they can pay or that they wish to 
pay, or as to the time when they can pay it ? People who are 
obliged to pay tribute are never consulted on such matters. They 
are expected to hold themselves in readiness to pay when the 
tax-gatherer arrives, and to pay what is demanded. 

The state has become an insatiable monster that is con- 
stantly devouring its own children ; or, what amounts to the 
same thing, constantly taking from them that by which they 
might be nourished and supported. As the practice is to-day, 
not a law is passed, we venture to say, by any legislature unless 
there is some purpose, either patent or concealed, to extort 
money from the public in order to enrich a few favorites of the 
party boss. The main business of every legislator is not to pro- 
tect the people, but to grind axes for those who are so fortunate 
as to be on the inside. In this sense, every public officer is an 
enemy of the people. He certainly lives at the expense of the 
people and gives to them little or nothing in return. Nothing 
can be imagined that is more oppressive than state rule. Even 
Feudalism that lasted a thousand years was far better, far more 
just to the masses. Gaulier was right when he called the state 
"a fictitious entity, an abstract conception of the brain." It is 
comparatively a modern discovery, and a wonderful contrivance 
it is. Nothing like it was known in ancient times. Men were 
robbed and compelled to sacrifice in other days, but not as now 
with their own consent. But at this time men will consent to 
be robbed every day, by the state, and then will go around sing- 
ing "glory," "hallelujah," and lauding their government as 
"the best that the world has ever known." People used to sing- 
praises to God in the same way, but now they ignore God and 
worship the state. 



204 



THE POLICY OF GOTEEXilEXT. 



What governs a man's conduct in life ? Not what is taught 
in his Bible, not what the state orders or directs, but what he 
believes to be right or necessary, or at least to be calculated to 
promote his interest. That and that alone governs a man's ac- 
tions. What a man does is a matter wholly between hiinself and 
himself. Change a man's belief, and you change his whole life 
and being. In no other way can such a result be achieved. 
Codes never make a man better — they do not govern his con- 
duct, except perhaps in a few particulars. Our Bible is full of 
rules and commands that nobody observes. After all, as we 
have said, the only real master that any man can have is him- 
self. No matter how powerful his oppressor may be, he himself 
can be free any moment if he wills. His master might kill him. 
but he could not take his freedom from him. He could not com- 
pel Mm to obey. People who are not afraid of dying or of being 
injured may always be free. 

One of the fictions of government is that the state is con- 
tinuous and never dies ; that courts are continuous, that rulers 
are continuous. The people of Thibet think the Grand Lama 
never dies, and yet he does nevertheless. The people are de- 
ceived by hocus pocus, and when the lama dies, as all lamas do 
eventually, his place is taken by a supposititious lama, who is 
not a lama at all till he is consecrated and made a lama. The 
principle is the same — the forms alone being different — in all 
governments. Every ruler must be continuous, or he cannot be 
legitimate. So village and city boards are supposed to be con- 
tinuous, but in reality every time a man goes out and a new 
man comes in. it is properly speaking a new board. As a matter 
of fact no man succeeds another man : he has nothing at all to 
do with his predecessor any more than he would if the prede- 
cessor had never existed. Lincoln's administration had no more 
to do with Jackson's administration than it would have had if 
these men had been presidents of different republics. Italy of 
to-day has nothing to do with Rome of two thousand years ago. 
There is no continuity anywhere. A journey from Buffalo to 
Albany is not continuous. It is one step at a time, and every 
step complete in itself and independent of all other steps. 

It is amusing to see how delighted people are with being 
governed, with being disciplined from day to day by their several 
masters ! They consider that government is eminently proper 
and necessary — the world could not exist a minute, they imagine, 
without government. How much interest they take in their 
chains ! They are so beautiful, so finely burnished, so hand- 
somely gilded ! And they render such a pleasing, jingling 
sound when they are toyed with or handled. People like to live 



THE POLICY OF GOVERNMENT. 



205 



in a prison — if it is a nice prison, handsomely furnished and con- 
veniently arranged, as government prisons are usually. People 
under modern governments have so many luxuries, so many 
comforts ! Who would not be one of the slaves of government, 
one of the subjects, under such favorable circumstances ? Peo- 
ple really forget that they are slaves, that they are living in a 
state of confinement in which there are many duties combined 
with a few privileges. People love to look around and see how 
much better housed and served they are than people are who 
live in heathen lands. They see so many palaces and such 
splendor all over their country that their eyes are dazzled. They 
do not own the palaces, and the splendor they behold is not their 
splendor, but all these things belong to their country and they 
have the pleasure of feeling that it was their money or their 
labor that helped to pay for these blessings. They have some 
pains and some inconveniences, it is true, but they feel that this 
is no more than might be expected. Indeed, things have always 
been so. It is known that they dare not express their thoughts, 
but as they do not have many, they do not feel at all hampered. 
They think that people ought to be willing to make some sacri- 
fices when they have such a kind government to protect and 
care for them. 

The masters that we usually obey, and those that we most 
dread, are those that we do not know and that we have never 
seen. Indeed, we are not even sure that they exist. We dread 
God above all, and we are ready to do something to appease him 
at all times. So we dread the state, and yet we have never seen 
the state aud we do not know where or what is the state. All we 
have seen in this direction is those who oppress and harass us 
continually in the name of the state, just as there are those who 
oppress us in the name of God. God we never see, and the state 
we never see— even of their actual, practical existence we are un- 
certain. Perhaps when the curtain is raised finally we shall 
find that there never was anything behind it. 

We pay great respect to a policeman, as people formerly did 
to priests, so long as he is a public officer, but when his blue coat 
and brass buttons are removed and he becomes a mere citizen 
once more, we give him no more heed than we would to any 
ordinary man. After his club is laid down and his coat re- 
moved, we would resist him like men, if he should attempt to 
exercise authority over us. But we ought to get rid of all such 
spooks as the "power of government " and the " will of the people " 
and deal with things as we actually find them. This representa- 
tion business is all bosh. There are no real representatives either 
of God or the people. We are always dealing with men — most 



206 



THE POLICY OF GOVERNMENT. 



ordinary, common men, and we should treat them accordingly. 

It is clear that the state binds, but cannot be bound. The 
state, the king, has no duties, no responsibility, and he acknowl- 
edges no obligations whatever. The master owes nothing to his 
slave ; the slave owes everything to his master. In feudal times 
there was reciprocity, but then there was no true mastership, no 
true slavery. In those days people believed in a God. The lord 
and the vassal both had their obligations and each had his rights. 
As we have often said, a slave has absolutely no rights. What 
we have now is comparatively a new condition of things. The 
state properly so called dates back only two hundred years, and 
the idea of a real city only to the thirteenth century. 

Government originally was merely the contrivance of de- 
signing men. There is not a word to be said in its behalf, any 
more than there is in favor of wickedness and crime in general. 
Seen fairly and in its true light, government is an unsightly 
monster. The government prospers solely through the sufferings 
and sacrifices of those whose business it is to support the govern- 
ment. Every nation thus far known to history has been founded 
upon the corpses of those who went down in battle. Govern- 
ment has no means of manifesting itself except through force. 
It revels in blood, and the groans of the dying are music in its 
ears. 

In every government, no matter how constituted, there are 
two parties, and only two, namely, the governed and the govern- 
ors. The fiction is nourished that there is some imaginary ex- 
istence called government that is different from either the 
governors or the governed, but that is simply a delusion. 
Government is exclusively a matter of men — always ordinary 
men. The interests of these two parties are diametrically op- 
posed to each other at all times. They are antagonistic. One 
produces and the other consumes, the producer in this case be- 
ing always the producer, and the consumer being always the 
consumer. They never for a moment change places. ' Again, it 
must be observed that government is always usurpation. There 
is no divine right to authority — that is a fraudulent pretense. 
In its very mildest form, also, government is uniformly tyranny. 
Government is a cancer, an excrescence, an abnormal growth 
that enlarges at the expense of the subject and destroys him at 
last. The end of all government is annihilation. There is no 
alternative, no middle ground, no avenue of escape. What has 
been will be, and those who read history know very well what 
has been. 

The loudest and most alarming of all complaints uttered by 
mankind at the present day are those made by people who, with- 



PROTECTION AND ITS FALLACIES. 



207 



out any fault of their own and with no prospect of improvement 
hereafter, are being robbed of their birthright. They cannot get 
what they earn ; they labor unceasingly for other peopie, for 
those who call themselves their masters and who treat them as 
slaves. This is what will make trouble some day throughout 
the world. When the time comes that people see for themselves 
and understand things as they really are, they are sure, like 
Samson, to pull down the pillars of the temple, though they lose 
their lives in the collapse that follows. There will be at least one 
satisfaction — the temple will be destroyed and its restoration 
thereafter will be something quite impossible. The creeds and 
theories of the present day are all wrong, and they are the source 
of most of our sorrows. To our creeds we owe a great share 
of our burdens. 



CHAPTER XXY. 
PROTECTION AND ITS FALLACIES. 

Protection is for slaves, or for those who assume the char- 
acter and play the part of slaves. An honest, independent, 
manly man never wants protection. He can take care of him- 
self, and therefore he asks no help from any source. Knaves 
and designing men often demand protection. But they merely 
pretend to be what they are not, weaklings, people who could 
not subsist without aid from others. This is a scheme, a fraud, 
a trick, that is being constantly played under all governments. 
Men call for protection simply because they imagine that the 
world owes them a living and they will have it. In other words, 
they are determined to live upon what other people have ac- 
cumulated. As for themselves, they refuse to work ; and like 
drones in the hive, they seek to live upon the earnings of other 
people. That is the mystery, the true inwardness of protection 
the world over. There is always a design back of every scheme 
of protection. 

Protection is something that cannot rightfully be demanded 
from any one by another. Protection is a piece of favoritism ; 
it is like a gift, it may be granted or not as a man chooses. 
There is no obligation to protect, as there is no obligation to give. 

Protection has largely, if not wholly, the characteristics of 
giving. It is always one-sided, and therefore always unjust. 



208 



PROTECTION AND ITS FALLACIES. 



When we protect some, we oppose others, or at least we leave 
others unassisted. Gifts are always partial, and for that reason 
unjust. To be just, we should give to all. There should be no 
favoritism. So there should be no protection, which is always 
favoritism in its most offensive form. If we protected all, we 
would protect none, for the very essence of protection is that a 
few should be protected, favored, at the expense and the disad- 
vantage of the many who are not protected. Nothing could be 
more heinous, more outrageous, than such protection. It is in- 
justice in its most aggravated form. 

Protection is one of the forms of sacrifice that prevails under 
governments of all kinds. Protection is always for the few and 
at the expense of the many. Protection, no matter in what 
shape or under what conditions, always costs something ; some- 
body must pay for it, and somebody must sacrifice so that he 
can pay for it. Again we say, protection and sacrifice always 
go together. It is just so in giving. Giving is always a sacrifice 
— it is always at somebody's expense. But why should anybody 
give, why should anybody protect ? There is no reason for such 
action, and certainly not any justification for such a demand. 
Why is not the giver as worthy and deserving as the one who 
receives ? Why is not the protector as deserving of favors as the 
one who is protected ? 

As a rule, a man who asks to protect you, should be regarded 
as a suspicious or dangerous person. Any man is dangerous to 
you when you are once placed in his power. People generally 
want to help those who are helpless, powerless ; they never 
want to help those who do not need or ask for help. They help 
those who are beneath them and whom they can use as their 
instruments. Generally men aid or protect no others. A man 
who aids and protects people out of pure goodness of heart, and 
without any ulterior motive, is an idiot. But even an idiot usu- 
ally has some motive, as he has some intelligence. Of course if 
he had no intelligence, he would be like a stick or a stone, and 
he would have no motive. 

Does the government have no motive when it protects peo- 
ple? Most assuredly it has a motive, a base motive, in all cases. 
The government likes to protect people, in order to keep them in 
a helpless condition. If every man were a real man, we should 
need no government and should have no government. We have 
government as it is because the majority of men are mere reeds 
shaken by the wind. They have minds, in the rudimentary form, 
but they have always depended upon the mind of the govern- 
ment, and they are content to continue in that helpless condition 
indefinitely. 



13 



PROTECTION AND ITS FALLACIES. 



209" 



But does the government really protect people? Does it 
protect all people, and does it protect them at all times ? Most 
assuredly it does not, and those who really believe that the 
government protects all people, or even most people, or any peo- 
ple to any great extent, are laboring under a misapprehension of 
facts. They are sadly mistaken. It is only a pretence on the 
part of government, it is an empty promise to induce people to 
pay their tribute cheerfully and without delay. How long would 
government last, if people should happen to get the idea into 
their heads that they could get along without the aid and pro- 
tection of their rulers? Not long — that much is certain. We 
have had government protection in this country for considerably 
over a century. We have it in great plenty to-day, and yet men 
are murdered and robbed as they never have been before ; some 
are killed by a trolley car, some by an automobile, some by a bi- 
cycle, some by a steam engine, and some by robbers at midnight. 
What good does government protection do? It is just like a 
man's having his life insured, expecting by doing so that he will 
never die. Men do die, whether they are insured or not ; and so 
men do die, whether they are protected or not. However, there 
is this striking difference between the two cases. If a man is 
insured in a sound company, his family get some money after 
his death. But how much does any man get from his govern- 
ment when he happens to be robbed or killed in some way un- 
fortunately ? Not one cent ! What would you say of a man 
who should presume and pretend so much and really perform so 
little as the government does regularly ? You would call him a 
fraud and turn away from him in disgust. But then there re- 
mains this miserable delusion that we could not get along with- 
out the government ! Poor things that believe thus — they are 
indeed to be pitied ? 

The government is constantly taking our money under the 
fraudulent pretence that it protects people. We have seen how 
it fails in the effort, and we may add that it never does anything 
of the kind. What does it do with the money that it takes from 
the people annually, and sometimes semi-annually? Why it 
keeps it and puts it in the bank or uses it. Surely the taxpayer 
never sees a cent of his money after it leaves his hands. If there 
happens to be a surplus, the taxpayer never sees a penny of it. 
It always goes to some one but himself. If he is robbed, if he loses a 
horse or a child, if his house is burned down, if he is dying from 
consumption or from heart disease, what does the government do 
for him ? What does it care ? Nothing, absolutely nothing ! 
The government is master, and masters never have duties or 



210 



PROTECTION AND ITS FALLACIES. 



obligations. It is the slave only that has duties and obligations : 
it is the slave only that pays tribute and suffers. 

We object to free lunches, free rides, free shows, free schools, 
free libraries and free books for the multitude, just as we do to 
protection under any conditions. There never was anything free 
that was not, or must not be, paid for by somebody. Free 
schools cost just as much as other schools, nay more, because 
people do not care how large the bills may be, if somebody else 
has to pay them. And so it is with free libraries, and everything 
■else that is free. It is free for some, at the expense of others, and 
everything of this kind is monstrously unfair and unjust. Every 
man should pay his own bills, and he should be compelled or 
called upon to pay no others. There is too much of this casting 
one man's burden upon the shoulders of another man, in this 
country. It is wrong, palpably, positively wrong. Oar scheme is 
to get some people to pay the debts that other people have con- 
tracted. That is what is called business at the present day. If 
a man has not the money, he knows where he can borrow it or 
get trusted — and that, he thinks, is a great deal better than to 
undertake to earn the money in the old honest way. At the 
present time, borrowing has become a craze. People borrow and 
nations borrow — money that they never expect to pay. Indeed, the 
lender does not want to be paid. He merely wants his interest 
regularly, and the higher that is, the better he likes it. He is 
not concerned about the principal. Knaves take advantage of 
this opportunity, and many a borrower goes into bankruptcy. 
Nothing could be more vicious or unsound than such a system, 
and disaster is sure to come in the end. But every man imagines 
that he himself will escape, while all the rest go under. Thus 
it is that the wicked work goes on. 



CHAPTER XXVI. 



SELF-DEFENCE AND NECESSITY. 

It is an alarming state of things when we must kill some- 
body in order to either protect ourselves or save our property — 
there is something radically wrong in such a selfish and cruel 
doctrine as that. We say it was necessary, and we were afraid ! 
No doubt we were afraid, for there are more cowards abroad in 
civilized life than people usually imagine. But suppose a man is 
a coward and is afraid, does that justify him in shooting the 
first man who crosses his path, particularly if it is done on his 
premises and in the night time ? 

Who shall decide what is necessary and what is not? A 
man may be a good judge of his own conduct, but has he any 
right to pass opinion upon the conduct of other men ? Where 
could he possibly secure such a right ? Because we are in danger, 
or we think we are, or we pretend that we think so, does that 
justify us in taking the law into our own hands and removing 
every one whom we consider unfriendly or dangerous? There 
is something wrong in such a proposition, popular and unques- 
tioned though it may be at the present time. But that is what 
all nations are ready to do, on occasion, in their intercourse 
with other nations ; they make a business of killing people, their 
enemies as they call them, and sometimes their friends, their 
own people, merely to protect themselves ! How cowardly and 
selfish it is! Great Britain started out to annihilate the Boers, 
and the United States to annihilate the Filipinos, so that these 
people might not prove to be troublesome in the future. That was 
the policy that the United States, a Christian nation, pursued 
with the Indians — and it succeeded. But how damnably wicked 
such a policy proved at last! The Devil could make just as 
good a plea as these nations could, for anything that he ever did. 
The Devil himself never does anything unless he considers it 



212 



SELF-DEFENCE AND NECESSITY. 



necessary. Indeed, he would be a fool if he did. The Devil, by 
the way, if we may be allowed to judge, is a gentleman com- 
pared with some people who call themselves Christians and fol- 
low what are called Christian practices in this century. The 
Devil is a coward — as rascals usually are — and that is the reason 
why he is always so anxious to protect himself. 

It is an awful doctrine — it is a crazy man's delusion — that it 
is necessary to kill, murder and torture people that happen to be 
in our power, just to protect our own pusillanimous selves and 
escape without injury. The main source of the villainies per- 
petrated in this world is found to lie in cowardice and cupidity. 
Tyrants are cruel because they are timorous and apprehensive, 
and rascals usually commit crimes for the mere purpose of secur- 
ing what they know does not belong to them. 



We are supposed to need God, need a religion, need a master, 
need government, need a state, need society and culture, need 
siu. But Heaven knows we do not really need any one of these 
things. On the contrary, they all need us, and they could not 
get along without us. Without us, society would be something 
entirely different from what it is now. We could go on and on 
indefinitely without the so-called blessings of civilization. As we 
get older, it is less and less that we care for society, and it is less 
and less that society can do for us ; as a child we needed society, 
because we were helpless, but as we get older, we find that we 
are able to help ourselves. 

Are men our only companions? Are there no birds and 
beasts? Did not Eobinson Crusoe live alone, without a white 
man ? He may have been lonely, but he lived. So did Boone, 
and so did many others. No, society needs us more than we 
need society. Were it not for ourself and yourself, and the rest, 
whence would the tribute come ? How would men get rich, 
and whence would the spoils come? We might need a com- 
panion or two. But is that society ? There are various kinds of 
society. We may have companions, but must we have masters 
and government? Instead of having a master, why might not 
we be a master ? That would be better. Really, government, 
with masters, is a late development, a result, a sort of achieve- 
ment of man. It is not a natural production. Animals have no 
government. Among them, every individual does as he chooses, 
or what he can, so long as he lets others alone. 

People get a great many impressions gratuitously. In other 
words, they dream. They imagine things are so ; they hear peo- 



SELF-DEFENCE AND NECESSITY. 



213 



pie say they are so, and after a while the conviction becomes 
established in their minds that things really are so. On no better 
foundation than this are most of the impressions of mankind 
usually based. 

For a long time people believed in witches ; they still be- 
lieve in spirits that wander about. They also believe in necessity, 
in fate, in luck, in Providence, and all such agencies as these. 
But where is the evidence ? We are not aware that there is any 
proof in that direction ; there may be some, but we have never 
as yet discovered it. If things are fated, if will, purpose, plan- 
ning and thought amount to nothing, or if they do not exist, 
why should people bother to make the effort to think or plan ? 
If things must be, we may as well sit down and wait till they 
happen to come along. We should then be like clay in the 
potter's hands, with our whole destiny shaped by fate. 

And yet, unquestionably, our life is made up wholly of 
efforts of ours, of choice, of will and resolutions on our part. 
Our temperament or character has undoubtedly much to do 
with our career in life, but if we had nothing but character, 
what would our life amount to ? How could we ever accomplish 
anything ? What we are fated to do, compelled to do, we cannot 
be said to do ourselves. It is only because men have will, 
thought, choice, and determination that anything is ever done. 
We move not because it is fated, but because we are impelled or 
incited to move — which would never happen if we did not think 
or will. The doctrine of fatality might answer in oriental coun- 
tries where men are content to be slaves, but not in occidental 
countries where people are expected to do something at least on 
their own account. 

It is a very unfortunate state of mind for anybody to fall 
into when he imagines that things are necessary and unavoid- 
able, that suffering is necessary, that sorrow is necessary, that 
crime is necessary, that despotism is necessary, or that wrong 
in any form is necessary. Necessity is the argument of knaves 
and despots, and sometimes it is the conclusion arrived at by 
fools. Tyrants are always preaching to subjects the necessity of 
submission ! And how beautifully and successfully the argu- 
ment works, and how it has worked for some thousands of 
years ! People submit and crawl in the dust because they im- 
agine that it is good for their digestion, and besides that it is 
absolutely necessary ! What would fools do if they did not have 
a master to advise and direct them ? It is very kind in God — or 
whoever it is that attends to such matters— to furnish fools with 
a king. Fools and kings always go together. They are complements 
of each other and one could not exist without the other under 



214 



THE RIGHTS OF MAN. 



any circumstances. If men, even a majority of them, were 
sensible, considerate, thoughtful and brave men, as they should 
be, kings would soon run out of business and such a thing as 
government would be unknown. 



CHAPTER XXVII. 



THE RIGHTS OF MAN. 



The rights of man are very good things for people to think 
of and talk about, but what is chiefly to be regretted is that such 
an important subject should have received for thousands of 
years past so very little attention from the great masses of man- 
kind. Instead of thinking for ourselves and investigating on our 
own account, we have been trusting to what such people as 
Aristotle and Plato said on this matter, two or three thousand 
years ago ; or to what the Fathers said, or what the Bible said, a 
code of laws, or a collection of decrees, prepared many centuries 
since and sent out from time to time in stray fragments for con- 
fiding people to read. The fact is that the best judge of right or 
wrong, or of the justice or injustice of a man's action, is the man 
himself. Indeed, who else could be the proper judge of his con- 
duct, his motives, and all the circumstances controlling his ac- 
tion ? Who is so wise, so learned, so astute, as to presume to lay 
down the law which other men must obey ? Any rational being 
would say that there is and there can be no such man. And yet 
strange to say, we have now worn our collar so long, and we 
have become so accustomed to the clanking of our chains, that 
we never take even the simplest step without first considering or 
inquiring whether it is lawful or not, or whether it is prudent 
to do so or not ! The only question that gives special concern is, 
how far will our chains permit us to go ? Time-serving idiots 
and cowards as we all are ! We require to be continually propped 
up by authority, by custom, by fashion, by public opinion, and a 
score of other spooks that we talk much about but of which we 
know very little. A bold, brave, manly man who dares to shake 
off all these chains of authority, all his prejudices, his whims and 
his false notions of every kind — where do you find him? We 
have never seen one ; we have never seen anybody that had seen 
one. We can find thousands, tens of thousands, nay millions 
of men that can tell to a nicety what others ought to do, what 



THE RIGHTS OF MAN. 215 

others ought to say, what others ought to contribute, what others 
ought to believe, but of those who can tell what they themselves 
ought to do, or say, or contribute, or believe — not a single one! 
What kind of a world is this that we are living in ; or rather, 
what kind of people are those who are found here at the present 
time? 

The people of the present age have strange notions of their 
rights, duties, missions and functions. There is Dr. Abbott, for 
example. He thinks the Filipinos ought to be evangelized, and 
that the United States government ought to have the job. It is 
his opinion that barbarism has no rights that civilization is 
bound to respect. He considers it to be the function of the 
Anglo-Saxon race to confer the gifts of civilization, through law, 
on the uncivilized peoples of the earth. There is nothing new 
about this outrageous doctrine — we have heard of it before. 
When nations get their eyes upon certain prey, and are bound to 
have it cost what it will, a trumped-up excuse for the con- 
templated crimes is just as good as any. "Shall we," Dr. Abbott 
is quoted as saying, " leave races just emerging from childhood 
to acquire capacity for self-government through the long and 
dismal processes of self-government ; or shall we serve as their 
guardians and tutors, protecting their rights, &c?" What a 
ridiculous pretense this is ! Who commissioned the Americans to 
be the conquerors, or the guardians and tutors, of the Filipinos, 
or of any other race? Have not the Filipinos just as good a 
right to become the guardians and tutors of the American peo- 
ple? They certainly would have, as far as rights go, if they had 
the largest and most powerful armies. All the right there is in 
the case lies in the comparative strength of armies. . 

Talk about our functions ! Napoleon had his functions, and 
Alexander had his before Napoleon came. Caesar, Sulla, Nero, 
Caligula, Charlemagne, Captain Kidd and Jesse James all had 
their functions ! Every murderer and rascal that this world has 
yet produced has had his functions — that is, he had his excuses 
for the wicked lines of policy which he decided to pursue. 

How is it that men lose their liberty and become slaves in 
civilized life ? As a rule this loss is a result of their own short- 
comings, their indolence, their supineness, their recklessness, 
their pride, their avarice and their fondness for display. They 
begin by conceding a little to those whom they accept as their 
representatives, and it is a short and easy route after that. 
These benefactors are soon transformed into masters and op- 
pressors — so it always is and must be. It is dangerous to give 
gifts, and still more dangerous to accept favors. Where little is 
given at first, much is demanded shortly after. So it is and has 



216 



THE RIGHTS OF MAN. 



been in all the processes and transformations of government in 
the past. We begin by entrusting our business to others and 
putting ourselves in their power, — the most dangerous innova- 
tion that was ever permitted by man. The only safe rule in this 
world, is to deal with everybody courteously but cautiously, and 
to keep him always at arms-length. So far as practicable in 
daily life, trust nobody, make no promises or contracts, and 
assume no obligations of any kind. Thus and thus only can you 
continue to be your own master. 

The growth of power and the increase of despotism has come 
from the same source in all countries and at all times — it always 
comes from small beginnings and from harmless concessions made 
at first. Usually something is done from a sense of duty, in nine 
cases out of ten something to please the Lord, and we make some 
man our agent or representative. We come to look upon him as 
our benefactor. This man in the course of time becomes our 
master, our governor, our king. Ten thousand times this bit of 
history has been repeated in the past of this world — first a 
servant, then an agent, then a representative, then a protector, 
and finally a monarch or master. 

And then people are so proud of masters ! They regard them 
as tlveir masters, and the splendor that they behold about them 
as their splendor. It is all theirs — their palaces, their army, their 
exploits, their renown. Well, these things do belong to the peo- 
ple, and they might well be proud of them, for they pay for them 
with their own toil and with their own life-blood. Unfortu- 
nately people can become accustomed, and finally indifferent, to 
anything, even to a despotism. People who are born under a 
despotism cannot conceive of any better condition of affairs than 
that which they find in their own country. That is the ad- 
vantage that tyrants always have. People never like a change 
and so they are content to go on and suffer indefinitely. 

Unconsciously and inadvertently our people are losing a 
little more of their liberties every day. So it always has been, 
and doubtless so it ever will be. Such transitions in the fortunes 
of people do not come in a day. The change goes on slowly, 
imperceptibly. What intelligent men should attend to first and 
above all things, is questions of government and state policy. 
But as a matter of fact they give such subjects no attention at 
all. They have other things more important ; they want to 
make money and seek pleasure. In the meantime it is the office- 
holders who run the government, and usually for their own per- 
sonal advancement. Our people take nothing seriously ; they 
are not of a serious turn. It is very interesting indeed to notice 
how a republic develops into an empire, as it uniformly does if 



THE RIGHTS OF MAN. 



217 



sufficient time is allowed. We have an object lesson in America 
to-day. Governments always begin with democracy and end 
with despotism. 

There can be no true progress in any country without 
liberty. There may be a display, a semblance of advancement, 
but it will be found on close examination to be simply an imita- 
tion of the genuine article, a semblance of what might properly 
be called progress. In order to advance, people must think — it 
is the only condition on which progress is possible — and if peo- 
ple think, they must be allowed full liberty to express their 
thoughts. Under a despotism, and while the people are held 
down in a state of bondage, no one flourishes but the king and 
his courtiers, and even they nourish only for a time. Science 
under a despot always languishes— so does art, so does literature. 
Above all other men, those who write and speak for the public 
should be accorded the most complete freedom in their utter- 
ances. If they cannot say what they think, there is no good in 
thinking. Writers and speakers might better be allowed oc- 
casionally to say something amiss than to be hushed entirely 
and not permitted to say anything at all. 

If we wish for illustrations of the truth of the position that 
we are taking, we have only to refer to French history during 
the last two or three hundred years. There was the case of 
Louis XIV., for instance, the most renowned of all the legiti- 
mate monarchs of France. Nothing could surpass the splendor 
of his reign, but he left a nation of paupers and mendicants to 
rejoice at his final departure. There was splendor indeed at the 
court, but misery and wretchedness everywhere else. That is 
the penalty that people always pay for having a powerful gov- 
ernment. As Buckle well says, under Louis XIV. , "There was nq 
popular liberty ; there were no great men ; there was no science ; 
there was no literature ; there were no arts. France had suc- 
cumbed and was laid prostrate." 

No, let it never be forgotten that under a despotic ruler 
truth is always suppressed, and in this suppression we shall find 
the origin of rebellion. France had the most frightful revolu- 
tion ever known in modern times, simply because the people had 
been kept in subjection till endurance was no longer possible. 
Even slaves will rebel at last. Unfortunately history has a 
habit of repeating itself, and fashions return after they have been 
forgotten for many long years. So it is with great events in 
history. 



CHAPTER XXVIII. 



THE GOOD OF THE PUBLIC. 



The world will never know precisely how much crime and 
wickedness has been perpetrated in the name of "public good." 
But the whole thing is a delusion, if not a fraud. There is not, 
and there never has been, such a thing as "public good ;" that 
is, there never has been such a thing as good for all the people, 
or even for the great body of the people. It will be found in all 
cases, on close inspection, that when people advocate some 
measure because it is for the public good, it is really for the 
good of a few favored ones, at the expense of the remainder. 
It is impossible that any measure should result in a personal 
benefit to every individual in a large community. Let us sup- 
pose it is a railroad project. A few may have land to sell and 
they are benefited if the railroad proves to be the purchaser. 
Others may have freight to carry, or they may expect to be 
favored in some other way. But others may have their beauti- 
ful farms ruined by being cut in two by the new railroad route. 
And so with towns. Some derive a benefit from the new rail- 
road through an increase of trade ; while other towns, differ- 
ently situated, will find that they lose trade by the proposed 
change. This is the way it works with every change that is 
made — the result being a benefit to a few and a loss to many 
others. Again, we repeat, " public good " is simply a delusion. 
It is a name applied to something that does not exist. 

But public good is something to talk about. It is something 
that unites people as nothing else will. People will enthuse on 
that subject who could not possibly be aroused in any other way. 
The moment you convince a man that some project that is talked 
about is for the public good it will be sure to command his 
support. Public good, according to his notions, means his per- 



THE GOOD OF THE PUBLIC. 



219 



sonal good, as well as the good of everybody else. Who would 
not endorse such a measure ? 

It should be borne constantly in mind that there is no public 
in the first place, no general or comprehensive being or creature 
independent of the individuals of which the public is composed. 
There is this man and that man, and a thousand or ten thousand 
others. But in all cases these are simply individual men just 
like ourselves— there are, and there can be, no others. So, when 
we talk about the good of the people and the benefits to be 
secured by them, we do not mean some imaginary or general 
being with some mysterious or incomprehensible character, but 
only a portion of the whole, usually only a very few men. If a 
law is passed to benefit the public, it will be found in every 
instance, on careful scrutiny, that it is only a few men, some 
people with a job or with an axe to grind, who are the ones that 
expect to reap the benefits. It is impossible that all should be 
favored ; somebody must sacrifice always. That is the penalty 
that men must pay for belonging to society and being subject to 
government. 



Let us consider this question of groups or combinations of 
men known as " the public " still farther. Why is it that bodies 
of men never do wise things ? Why is it that a man while a 
member of any organized body of men never knows as much as 
he does while acting entirely on his individual responsibility? 
This is an interesting problem in psychology. A man who is a 
member of a group will do foolish things that he would be 
ashamed to do as an ordinary citizen. One of the reasons for 
this seems to be that the responsibility is divided, or at least 
negatived in some way. Each man hides behind his colleagues, 
and, like the ostrich, he imagines that nobody can see him ! The 
blame, when there is blame, is thrown upon the whole body, and 
so it does not affect any single individual. That is one of the 
secrets of this mysterious phenomenon. 

But above and beyond this, a man who is simply a member 
of a body loses his individuality, and with it, to a large extent, 
his customary intelligence. In other words, for some reason, he 
really knows less than he did before. Hence bodies of all kinds 
— towns, cities, states, legislatures, companies and corporations 
of every name and nature — are the prey of some designing and 
unscrupulous machinator who is always playing some trick upon 
lethargic and unsuspecting members and taking them at a dis- 
advantage. The only case where a man is a man at all times 



220 



THE GOOD OF THE PUBLIC. 



and under all circumstances, is where he stands up and acts 
entirely upon his own responsibility. The idea that ten men 
know more than one man is a fatal delusion. Where intellect 
is required, there is no instance where one man would not do 
better than a number of men. It all depends upon the caliber or 
character of the men themselves. One man would go and do the 
job, while ten men would hesitate and consult. What would be- 
come of an army with ten heads ? 

People are really better as individuals than society as a 
whole. People are always better than their laws, better than 
their Bible, better than their government, better than the church 
to which they belong. When prejudices, fears or self-interest 
do not intervene, men as individuals are inclined to be fair, kind, 
just, reasonable and humane. It is natural for men to be so, as 
it is natural for animals to be so. A man never exhibits his sel- 
fishness and his meanness in its complete fullness until he be- 
comes a member of civilized society. What crime would a patriot 
hesitate to commit if he imagined that through this crime he 
could benefit his country? What has been the history of the 
church in the same direction ? Does not the end always justify 
the means ? Is there anything that the faithful do that is wrong, 
if it helps the church ? 

As a rule a man should keep out of crowds, clubs, societies 
and associations, because by joining them he loses his identity 
and he can never act like himself. Men cannot think in crowds, 
or at least they cannot have full control of their thoughts. Con- 
fusion unsettles the minds of men, and contact with others 
renders a free course of thought impossible. Sound thinking in 
crowds is simply impracticable. This is the main reason why 
bodies of men never do good work. They never do efficient 
work, and the direction they decide to take is seldom the best 
possible. It is rare that governments do really sensible things ; 
their work is uniformly done in the slowest and most ex- 
pensive manner possible. A man's connection with crowds 
weakens his judgment and unsettles his convictions. He is actu- 
ally paralyzed or hypnotized by what he sees other people do or 
hears them say. It is impossible for any man not to be in- 
fluenced by his associations — it is only a question of more or less 
in all cases. We have before us again the old question of sugges- 
tion which we have considered before. 



CHAPTER XXIX. 



RIGHT TO PROPERTY. 

When people finally come to possess clearer and more sensible 
ideas of property than those that now prevail, they will un- 
doubtedly get along better than they do at present. As a matter 
of fact, there is no property to which any man has any more than 
an assumed title. No man really has anything which he can 
call his own. The whole idea of property comes from deception 
on the part of the state, which, while claiming to own the whole 
country, deals it out in parcels to those whom it considers deserv- 
ing. The Devil put forth a similar claim in the days of our 
Saviour. In fact this whole property conception is an invention 
or an artifice of the Devil himself. 

Men imagine that they own this or that. Every man owns 
his horse, his cow and his dog ; he also owns his wife and child- 
ren. The master owns his slaves. But how did he come into the 
possession of these pieces of property ? Why does he own them ? 
He might as well pretend to own God, the air, the water, the 
sky, and even the food he eats. Indeed, we do speak of our God, 
our country, our territory, our streams, our mountains. How 
strangely absurd this is ! We really own nothing, absolutely 
nothing. Right of conquest— what does that amount to ? Even 
the things upon which our hands are placed are not really ours, 
since a stronger party may come along and take them away 
at any time. All the titles to which we pretend have come from 
the state. But where does the state get its titles ? 

A large portion of the property of people comes by way of 
inheritance. But how could there be any valid title derived 
from a dead man ? This is also an artifice, the design of which is 
to keep property in families and give the state more stability and 
power. However, there is no semblance of justice in a claim to 



222 



RIGHT to property, 



property based solely on the right of inheritance. Ir is true that 
without such a. law of inheritance, we should not have wealth to 
any appreciable extent, but we do not consider that a misfortune 
to society by any means. There is no great merit, and certainly 
no great utility, in wealth. The world would be better off with- 
out wealth. We have said that before, and we take pleasure in 
repeating the assertion once more. Wealth helps to develop 
civilization, and civilization helps to develop wealth. The two 
have a community of interest. In truth, they are inseparable. 
Wealth is always for the few. a very few. while paupers are 
found in unlimited numbers all along the avenues that lead to 
wealth, 

Finally , where do rights and claims originate '? Who pos- 
sesses rights that are to be doled out to other people r Nobody 
has yet been able to justify his claim to any such prerogative. 
The man who presumes to grant rights and privileges is no better 
in any respect than other men are who make no such preten- 
sions. We hear much about rights of seniority, of regularity, of 
legitimacy, and rights of birth. How preposterous ! 



CHAPTER XXX, 

OUR FALSE NOTIONS. 

There are many things that we might do, if we chose, to 
dissipate our sorrows and lessen our sufferings, and the first step 
in that direction would be to lower our standard of -pride and pay 
less regard to what we call our sense of honor. It is a well 
known fact that our pride is responsible for a large share of our 
mental sufferings, and that the causes of our sorrows are in many 
■cases purely imaginary. If our honor were not given such a 
conspicuous place as it holds, and if it did not bring us so fre- 
quently into conflict with others, things would move along 
more smoothly than they do and we should find fewer troubles 
than men experience in life usually. If people were less sensi- 
tive and less proud than they are, they would not find so many 
-things in their pathway that offend them. This is especially the 
case with nations. They have such extravagant notions of their 
rights and they pay so much regard to trifling circumstances 
which are supposed to affect their honor, that it is very difficult 
for then neighbors to continue to live with them on anything 
like peaceful or friendly terms. 



OUR FALSE NOTIONS. 



223 



It should be remembered that the old Greeks and Romans 
had no such conception of national honor as we have. Indeed, 
at that early day there were no nations in the propei sense of the 
word. Such a thing as national pride was not known to the 
Chinese, or to the Hindoos or Mahometans. The honor to which 
we hold so tenaciously and that causes us such constant trouble 
or concern is a growth of the Middle Ages, and it had its rise in 
feudal times with feudal ideas. Our pride and punctilio are 
knightly in their characteristics. We parade as the knights did 
of old. though we lack many of the virtues that belonged to that 
order. 

It is indeed a strange thing that we are so absurdly partic- 
ular about what people say of us, and yet we care so little what 
they think about us, either before death or after. As a matter 
of fact, what people think of us is all there is of the matter, and 
what they say of us has no great significance. At most what 
people say is only an expression of what they think, and they 
should be permitted to talk freely and without fear of giving 
offence, as that is the only way by which we can ascertain their 
feelings, wishes or intentions. We have always said that peo- 
ple are in no wise to blame for what they think, since thoughts 
always come unbidden, and are entirely outside of the control of 
men. But why should we be blamed for what we say. if, as has 
been seen, what we say is simply what we think ? 

If what people said were always known to be true, or if say- 
ing a thing and proving it were identical, then the case might 
sometimes be serious, but we all know that what people say may 
or may not be true, and it is very unjust to condemn a man on 
the bare evidence of what other men assert. If a man lies about 
us, the community will soon learn that he has borne false wit- 
ness, and the one to suffer in the end will be the slanderer 
himself. But if on the other hand he has told the truth about 
us, what right have we to complain ? So, as we have said, let 
people talk — talk what they please, and as much as they please. 

Men as a rule should not bother their heads about the evil 
things that others are saying about them. It is what we our- 
selves know that we are, and not what people think or say we 
are, that should concern us. As a rule of life, the less we have 
to do with other people every way, the better it will be for all 
concerned. Let us have manliness and independence, and not 
waste any time in worrying over what people think and say of 
us. If people happen to love us, that is very well, and if they 
do not happen to love us, perhaps that also is well. It is cer- 
tainly people's privilege to like our ways or not like them, and if 
they do not like them, they ought to have the privilege of ex- 



224 



OUR FALSE NOTIONS. 



pressing their opinions about them without giving offence to any 
one. However, if we could find any gratification in doing so, 
we might make the matter even by letting them know in some 
quiet manner that their ways are not very agreeable to ourselves. 

No, it is a very silly thing to get angry at what people say 
about us, and especially when they amuse themselves by calling 
us hard names. If they were decent people, if they were really 
honorable people, they would not condescend to such an abuse 
of language as that, but if they will stoop to such epithets, the 
only course left for us is to turn our backs upon them and let 
them pass on. If others do not do what is right, that is cer- 
tainly no affair of ours. What we do ourselves— that is the 
whole question for us to consider at all times. 

The well known German philosopher, Schopenhauer, says 
with much truth : 

1 ' A man must himself have but a poor opinion of his own 
worth who hastens to prevent the utterance of an unfavorable 
opinion by giving his enemy a black eye. True appreciation of 
his own value will make a man really indifferent to insult ; but 
if he cannot help resenting it, a little shrewdness and culture 
will enable him to save appearances and dissemble his anger. If 
we could only get rid of this superstition about honor — the idea, 
I mean, that it disappears when you are insulted, and can be re- 
stored by returning the insult ! If we could only stop people 
from thinking that wrong, brutality and insolence can be legal- 
ized by expressing readiness to give satisfaction, that is, to fight 
in defense of it ! " 



14 



CHAPTER XXXI. 



WHAT IS TIME? 



It is hard to define what cannot be defined, what has no 
limits, no metes and bounds, and no special characteristics of any 
kind. Time, like everything that is not material, is a mere con- 
ception of man, something that exists while we exist and that 
sinks into nothingness when we depart. It has no middle point, 
and neither beginning nor end. Every man has his own time, 
his own views of time, his own means by which he distinguishes 
or measures time. A long time for one man is a short time for 
another. We count our time from one starting point, and others 
count from another. The Christian nations count from the 
birth of Christ, while the Romans counted from the founding of 
Rome, and the Mahometans from the flight of their prophet. We 
count by days, and savages count by seasons or moons. Children 
and wild races have no such ideas of time as we have. They 
often do not know their age and they are never concerned about 
time generally. They do not make tasks of their work, and so 
time with them hardly enters into the problem. 

We usually speak of three divisions of time : the past, the 
present and the future. But where shall we draw the line that 
divides the three ? Things themselves have nothing to do with 
time ; whether they are or were or will be, they are always the 
same. Time belongs only to events, to things that transpire. 
But if you are going to apply time to them, it is the past only 
that comes in question. An event is not an event until it has 
happened, and the moment it happens, it is a thing of the past. 
What do we know of what is yet to come, what never has been ? 
Absolutely nothing. Again, we repeat, it is merely the past 
that concerns us. We are affected only by things that have 
happened. It is simply these subjects that we consider and dis- 



226 



WHAT IS TIME. 



cuss. We may get some light on the nature of time by looking 
into the history of tenses. In grammar we have, always follow- 
ing custom, three tenses, the past, present and future. But if 
we inquire into the history and development of the tenses, we 
shall find that they are simply modifications of one and the same 
thing. See and saw, is and was, sit and sat, begin and began, love 
and loved are essentially one and the same word, and neither has 
a single element or increment that the other does not also pos- 
sess. Has gone is really a present form, but it has a past mean- 
ing, and there is no doubt but that the past or preterit is ob- 
tained by simply dropping the has. It is a very common thing 
to get the past in precisely that way, as we say ire done it, for 
did it, or have done it. That the future is a modified present is 
something that every philologist knows. We say 1 begin to- 
morrow, for I will begin. Indeed, will begin itself is a present 
form ; and Latin faciam, I will make, is not materially different 
from facio, I make. Every writer finds himself in doubt whether 
to use the present or the past form, and whether to speak of 
things as happening or as having happened. Shall we say : he 
said lie was going, or lie is going ; he said he was making figures, or 
he is making ? We may be certain that in all cases where the 
mind is in doubt, no great difference exists, and we need not 
worry much whether we use one form or the other. If we are 
at table and we are in doubt whether we had better use a fork or 
a spoon, we may feel certain that no great damage will be done 
no matter which we use. Intuition is infallible ; reason is often 
fallible. Nature never makes any mistakes — man often does. 
The uneducated are frequently in doubt whether they had better 
say see or saw, come or came, begin or begun, sing or sang or sung, 
and the reason why they are so is that it makes no difference 
which word is used, the two being really identical words that 
have varied somewhat in form in the course of time. . It is well 
to bear in mind that no word can change its signification, or its 
application, by simply changing its sound or modifying its orthog- 
raphy. Words come to vary in form and sound because they 
are used by different people, and often under different circum- 
stances. For us everything is past, and nothing has any value 
until it is past. The present is a point so infinitely small that it 
is inappreciable. Of the future we know nothing until it has 
become the past. 

Finally, when we speak of facts or events, time cannot 
properly enter into the question. If a tree is forty feet high, 
it is forty feet high — and time, as to-day, yesterday or to- 
morrow, has nothing to do with the matter. If a man is dead 
that is all there is of it, and whether his death occurred ten 



WHAT IS TIME. 



227 



minutes since or ten days ago does not affect the fact as a fact 
in the slightest. It is often difficult to decide when to say is and 
when was. Whatever was is, and what is was, and forever shall 
be. If a book is worth $5.00, where does the question of time 
come in? Or if a bell has a deep tone, where does time enter 
into the case? It may lose or change its tone, but that is a 
matter that does not concern us. What may happen is entirely 
out of our province. It is not even worth a thought. We never 
know what may happen or what might happen. As intimated 
before, the future is outside of our domain. We may learn some- 
thing from what has happened — never from what may or might 
happen. We may be certain that no two events ever happen 
twice alike in succession under any circumstances. There is 
always a fatal variation that makes one quite different from the 
other. Nature never does anything twice alike, never makes 
anything twice alike. It could not if it tried, for the conditions 
must differ somewhat in each case. The Siamese twins resem- 
bled each other greatly, and yet there was a vast difference be- 
tween the two men. 

If we did not have clocks to tick and strike and thus count 
the hours for us, or if we did not observe the sun when it sets 
and when it reappears in the morning, — in a word if we were not 
continually counting — we should know nothing about time. If 
we should fall asleep in a darkened room, and awake without 
anything to guide us, as the striking of the clock, or the light of 
the sun or the crowing of cocks, we could form no idea as to 
how long we had slept or what time it might be. There would 
be no time for us, unless we found something to measure by, as 
some sound, or the arrival of some visitor. We should be like a 
vessel in a fog, or a person lost in a forest, having no means of 
determining our bearings. In itself there is no time, and as a 
matter of fact time has absolutely nothing to do with things. 
Time itself does not move ; it is only the things that measure 
time which move. 

Time is short or long to us only as it seems ; at most time is 
only something that seems, and as it seems to us it most assuredly 
does not seem to any other creature. Animals do not measure 
time as we do, for they have no clocks and it is highly improb- 
able that they take note" of the height of the sun at any moment. 
With them the question is not whether they live long or short, 
or how long or short, but simply whether they live at all or not 
and get enough to eat. To a large extent this is the problem 
also for the natives, or men in the wild state. They certainly do 
not count time as we do ; they simply live to eat and eat to live. 
They have no tasks ; they achieve nothing, they accumulate 



228 



ANALYSIS OF MOTION. 



nothing, practically speaking. They have no ambition, no as- 
pirations, no expectations, no hopes unfulfilled, and so what dif- 
ference does it make to them whether life is short or long? 
It is the cultivated, cultured man alone that dreads to die. 
He has so much work to be done, so many children to pro- 
vide for, so much property to care for or dispose of, that he has 
no time to die and he does not care to discuss the subject. Of 
course he hates to die — he dreads dying above all other things. 
Not so with the savage or the brute. He never counts upon 
living. With him it is only the pain of dying, and even about 
that he is not so much concerned, for he does not feel and suf- 
fer as the cultured people do when they die. 



CHAPTER XXXII. 
ANALYSIS OF MOTION. 

What is motion ? What does a body do when it moves ? 
What must be done to enable it to move, or to compel it to move ? 
Is a body ever compelled to move ? All these are important 
questions that are not so readily answered. Certain it is they 
never yet have been answered in a manner that is considered 
entirely satisfactory. Is a body always in motion? It is so 
claimed. But if it is so, it can never be in motion, since in order 
that a body should be continually in motion, it must be con- 
tinually stopping. A body cannot move unless it has begun at 
some point, and it can never be put in motion unless it has first 
been in a condition of rest. Motion and rest, like all opposites, 
are one and inseparable. One continually implies the other. 

Does a body ever go from one point to another ? What has 
one body to do with another? Where is the relation, what is 
the connection? In going, a body simply moves and keeps 
moving without the slightest reference to anything else. And 
yet according to our conception of motion, a body could not 
move unless it had some point to start from and some objective 
point to arrive at. But really when a body moves, it starts from 
its own place, always carries its own place with it, and when it 
stops, it is uniformly in its own place again. We are accustomed 
to say that when a body moves, it changes its place. But, 
really, does it do so? Is a body ever without the place it oc- 



ANALYSIS OF MOTION. 



229 



cupies? Does it ever lose it, ever change it? And if a body actu- 
ally does not lose or change its place, how could it properly be 
said to move ? One thing is evident, a body can never be quite 
destitute of a place ; and still we seem to have the impression 
that when a body leaves a place, as A, it must be in a state of 
"betweenity" or vacuity while it is moving to the objective 
point B ; or in other words, there must be at least an instant 
while it has absolutely no place. Another conception seems to 
prevail in regard to motion, that the body in motion stretches 
from A to B, and really clings to A while it is moving to B. 
However, this must be quite imaginary. As a matter of fact, a 
body in motion is independent in its action, and its movement 
cannot have any connection with any other body. Motion, so 
far as there is motion, implies absolute freedom from all ties 
connecting the moving body with other objects. The heavenly 
bodies would not move unless they were free to move. 

We are fond of talking of revolutions in bodies, of bodies 
that revolve around some central object, as the moon around 
the earth and the earth around the sun. But in these cases, 
what connection or relation is there between the central body 
and the one that revolves ? Absolutely none whatever. It is 
assumed that the sun holds the earth in its orbit , and the earth 
holds the moon in its place, but there is not a particle of evi- 
dence to support any such claim or contention as this. There 
is no such thing in nature as one body going around another. 
There may be scores of objects inside the circle, without their 
having any relation to or connection with the moving body. 

We should remove from our minds, once for all, all belief in 
the power of attraction between bodies. There is no evidence 
that any attraction exists ; there is no proof that any body ever 
exerts a power over another body at any time or under any con- 
ditions. The power of attraction, for which so much is claimed, 
appears to be an impossibility. There is no case in nature where 
any such power is exemplified. A horse may draw a sleigh, but 
it never draws a sleigh to itself. The sleigh would not move a 
hair's breadth farther than the drawing power moves. Suppose 
we draw a body with our hand and the help of a cord. The 
body moves no farther than the hand moves, and the moment 
the cord slackens, the power ceases to act. 

Much has been said since Newton's time about the power of 
gravity. But is there to-day, or has there ever been, such a 
power as gravity ? We see no evidence that there is or ever has 
been any such agency. Bodies may meet together, and still not 
be attracted. They may meet by accident, or through impulse 
of some kind. In the case of falling bodies there is no proof 



230 



ANALYSIS OF MOTION. 



that the attracting power of the earth is the real cause of the 
fall. The power of gravity is supposed to be a universal and 
constantly acting power, and yet it is actually rare that bodies 
fall. They fall only in exceptional cases. They fall not because 
they are attracted downward, but because they are not sup- 
ported. Bodies properly supported never fall, no matter how 
great may be their elevation or how strong the power of gravity. 
Bodies can only move, and certainly they can fall only, while 
they are in a fluid medium the particles of which yield readily 
to pressure or the power of penetration. There is no motion, no 
visible motion, in solids. When a body falls, as in air or water, 
it simply sinks, and this happens because the fluid yields. There 
is for this sinking phenomenon no other reason apparent to the 
mind of man than this lack of support to which we have just 
referred. Some bodies sink in water, as lead, while others rise, 
as wood and cork do. And so it is in air and other fluids. The 
phenomenon clearly does not depend upon gravity, but upon the 
nature or characteristics of the body and the density of the 
medium in which it moves. 

It should' be noted here that all bodies are supported at all 
times and under all conditions, in fluids as upon solids, and 
whether at rest or in motion. A bird that flies is supported, just 
as a fish that swims, a man that walks or a train of cars that 
moves is supported. The fact that a fluid yields more or less 
readily, is no proof that it does not support bodies. A pair of 
springs yields, and yet it affords support. Mud or clay supports, 
and yet it yields to pressure. Anything, even the rocks, will 
yield under a heavy weight. Again we urge that all bodies, at 
all times, and under all circumstances, are supported. Bodies 
fall, not because they are attracted but because their support 
yields or gives way. Bodies do not fall to anything, they simply 
sink, and they will continue to sink so long as their support con- 
tinues to yield. It is nonsense to talk about bodies falling to the 
surface of the earth or towards the center of the earth. The air 
is just as much the surface of the earth as the rocks are. Noth- 
ing falls that is properly supported ; nothing fails to rise when it 
is lighter than thp fluid in which it is immersed. Bodies fall be- 
cause of their nature and the circumstances in which they are 
placed, and they rise for the same reason. If all bodies were 
alike in character they would perform alike, always, under the 
same conditions. 

We should banish all ideas of attraction as we should banish 
all ideas of power. We speak of persons being attracted, as if 
one person drew another. To draw implies an effort on the part 
of the one that draws. However, it is evident that no such effort 



ANALYSIS OF MOTION. 



231 



is made or power exerted where we find that one person pleases 
another. The one that pleases is entirely passive, precisely as 
when a picture pleases or a flower pleases. People are attracted 
only so far as they are interested or delighted, and not because 
they yield to some mysterious power. The sun in a sense ex- 
ercises an influence, but it exerts no power and its efforts are not 
directed to any object. The sun warms, but that is a mere in- 
cident and not the result of effort or exertion. What is most 
absurd in our theories of gravity is that the earth draws down 
and is at the same time drawn up. Where do we find anything 
like this in practice? The horse might draw the sleigh, but who 
ever heard of a sleigh drawing the horse ? We venture to say 
that not a particle of evidence has ever yet been produced that 
shows that power is exerted at any time, in any way, by matter 
over matter. 

We speak of weight as if it were the measure of the earth's 
attraction. Bat weight is rather a measure of the support which 
a body receives. In air it weighs more than in water because it 
is supported less. If the air was more dense, bodies in the air 
would weigh less. Bodies also weigh more or less according to 
their density, and somewhat according to their form. A balloon 
in the air weighs nothing, and so with a cork in the water. 

The subject of centripetal and centrifugal forces may next 
engage our attention. It is generally assumed that the heavenly 
bodies are kept in their orbits through the agency of these two 
forces, the centripetal tending to draw to the center and the 
centrifugal carrying the body away. As often happens, the 
theory in this case does not accord with the facts. At least there 
is no phenomenon anywhere in nature, so far as our experience 
extends, that would serve to substantiate any such doctrine as 
that taught by the scientific men of the present day on this sub- 
ject. It is commonly supposed that this phenomenon is entirely 
similar to that of a ball made to revolve around a central point 
through the help of a string fastened at one end. By means of 
force applied directly to the ball, it can be made to revolve. But 
let us see what actually happens. The string does not draw the 
ball to the center, it merely prevents it from going away from 
the center farther than its own length. So far from the string 
having any drawing power, the moment it slackens it becomes 
powerless. In the case of the sling, which is similar, the opera- 
tor is enabled to draw the ball down, in its movement, to lift it 
up and to carry it either to the right or left. After the ball is 
made to revolve rapidly and it is finally let go, it does not move 
to the center nor fly away from it, but it goes off in a tangent in 
the very direction it was going when released. No body can of 



282 



ANALYSIS OF MOTION. 



itself change its direction while in motion. There is no true 
centrifugal force, as there is no centripetal force. The ball or 
stone when released has no regard either for a center or for 
circular motion. As said before, it simply moves off in the 
direction it was moving at the time it was released. 

In the case of the sun and the earth there is no string nor 
connection of any kind, and no means by which force could be 
exerted upon bodies millions of miles away. The sun could not 
put heavenly bodies in motion nor control nor direct their move- 
ments after the movement had begun. Instead of being the 
source or origin of power, the sun is doubtless subject to the 
same laws as the other heavenly bodies, and it is every way as 
helpless as they are. The power that moves the heavenly bodies 
must reside in the bodies themselves. No power can act where 
it is not. Moreover, it must be remembered that the sun is not a 
central point but only an approximation to something of that 
kind. The paths of the planets are not circles ; they are not even 
ellipses, nor are they regular paths of any kind. Planets do not 
follow the same path for any two succeeding years. It is absurd 
to claim that the sun keeps the planets in their orbits when the 
fact is they have no one course which they always pursue. 
The heavenly bodies are not alone in moving irregularly. No 
body in motion on the earth ever moves regularly. The bird 
that flies goes along by fits and stops and starts, just like a row 
boat which is propelled by oars. It does not go straight ahead ; 
no object that moves goes straight ahead or follows a straight 
line. It weaves along from side to side, and up and down, as a 
man does when he walks or a horse when he trots. The ball 
after it leaves the rifle is far from moving in a direct path. It 
twists and turns and oscillates and revolves. So does water 
when it is poured from a vessel. Notice the stream that flows, 
or the flame or smoke that rises in any case, and see if it moves 
regularly in a straight line. On the other hand it curls and 
twists and revolves in a most curious manner. No body, as a 
top, can turn or move in its place ; it must have room to vibrate 
in or wobble, as the planets do, or as a piece of wood does in a 
turning-lathe. Movement is rather in spirals than in circles, as 
we can see in the falling of a small stream of syrup from a vessel. 

Again, it is, as already intimated, of the very essence of 
motion that moving bodies must continually stop while they are 
in motion. A body moving must stop before it can change its 
direction, and it can move in only one direction at a time. We 
know that the man that walks, the horse that runs, the bird that 
flies and the boat that is propelled, are constantly stopping. They 
must stop ; that is one of the essential conditions of the case. A 



ANALYSIS OF MOTION. 



233 



body must stop to move, and it must move to stop. When a man walks, 
he keeps one foot on the ground, so that he is practically always 
at rest. So in rolling a cube, which is the same as rolling a 
wheel. The cube has one side or corner always on the ground 
and at rest. A log rolls in the same manner, being circular in 
form and having many short, straight sides, with angles as in 
polygons. A body that moves is always supported, as the body 
at rest is always supported. A train of cars moving a hundred 
miles an hour is supported ; so is the bird that flies or the fish 
that swims. As it is supported, it is always practically at rest. 
There must also be resistance, or bodies could not move ; there 
must be something substantial for the wing of the bird or the 
oar of the boat to operate upon. An oar pushes against the 
water as the pole is pushed against a wall to put a boat in motion. 
Fluids offer just as much resistance as solids do, only they yield 
more readily. 

And after all that has been said about motion, and with all 
its presumed importance, it is only a stupendous dream ! It 
is merely what man thinks or imagines. It is not something 
stable, with a fixed and unvarying character of its own. No 
such motion as this can be found in all this world. Of itself 
alone we can never decide whether a body moves or not. We 
cannot even decide whether we ourselves move or not. We 
must have something to start from and mark by. If we lose 
sight of that, we lose sight of motion entirely. If we are shut in 
a car or boat where we can see no objects by which to judge, we 
cannot tell where we are nor whether the boat or car is moving 
or standing still. So if we are up in a balloon where there is 
nothing to guide us, we get no idea of motion. We could hardly 
demonstrate that we move. It is easier to demonstrate that we 
are always at rest, and yet we know that we are always in mo- 
tion ! It is a strange matter, view it as we like. It is prob- 
ably the fact that we move only by participating in the motion 
of some other body, as in the case of riding in a car, while we 
are really at rest. Motion produces no effect upon the character 
of bodies. They must remain exactly the same, or they could 
not change their place. Motion is rather the result than the 
cause of change. 

We never see things move. We merely notice that they 
have moved by their changed relations with bodies around them, 
but in many cases it is hard to determine which is the body that 
has moved. The distance would be the same whether A moves 
or B moves, and distance is all that we know about motion. 
How shall we ever have motion around a center, when the dis- 
tance never changes? Again, for an object to be properly a 



234 



ANALYSIS OF MOTION. 



center of revolution, it must be stationary ; but the heavenly 
bodies are not stationary, and therefore they cannot properly be 
considered to be centers of revolution. In fact, there is no such 
revolution. 



Unquestionably the time will come some day or other when 
men will change their ideas radically on such subjects as time, 
distance, motion, attraction and power generally. People ask 
what makes a body move, and then they answer their own ques- 
tion, by saying that impulse or attraction is the cause. These 
terms are used simply to conceal ignorance. But it would be 
more candid, and better every way, to answer in such cases that 
we do not know. However, our pride intervenes and we content 
ourselves with an idea, and with what is really a spirit or a spook. 
No spook has done more harm to science than our conception of 
" attraction," chiefly from the fact that when a false or ficti- 
tious cause is accepted, all search for the true cause is abandoned. 

Motion, like time, distance, size, is in all cases delusive. It 
is an inference, a conclusion, an impression, on the observer's 
part. It is impossible to picture motion ; we can represent only 
some fixed position, as a raised foot, which leaves the impression 
of motion. All that we see, all our ideas of every kind, are the 
results of calculation and conclusions on our part. In the kineto- 
scope we have only a series of fixed positions which follow each 
other in quick succession in such a manner as to leave upon the 
observer an impression of movement. A body never moves— it 
merely is moved. It never changes its place, since its place is an 
inseparable part of itself. 

Again we say there is no such thing as motion, as there 
is really no such thing as time or distance. Men have simply 
ideas of motion, as they have ideas of time, distance and dimen- 
sion. These ideas are constantly changing. Men now believe 
that the earth revolves around the sun, but the world is sure to 
reject that belief someday or other. We cannot picture time; 
we cannot picture size or distance. A small man looks just as 
big on paper as a large man does. All pictures leave false im- 
pressions. Ireland may have as much space as Russia has — it 
all depends on the scale. Maps do not show distances, though 
we may form an estimate by applying the scale and calculating. 

As philosophers we are constantly asserting what we know 
to be false and treating as realities things that we know do not 
exist. We imagine, and then we believe we know. During our 



ANALYSIS OF MOTION. 



235 



whole existence we are dealing merely with our thoughts, and 
we are constantly comparing and combining these thoughts in 
order to develop new thoughts. Our whole knowledge is simply 
what we think. We have nothing but notions and impressions. 
We cannot have the slightest conception how other people feel 
or how they think. We are constantly talking about centers 
and circles, when we must confess that as a matter of fact there 
are no real centers or circles. So we talk about ellipses and 
parabolas, when we know that nature furnishes no examples of 
regular figures of any kind. We assert that the sun holds the 
earth in its place, when we know that nothing holds the earth 
in its place ; it moves about freely and continuously and it never 
pursues the same path any two days or any two years in suc- 
cession. Indeed, it is evident that the sun cannot hold itself in 
its place, for it is continually in motion like other bodies. We 
are constantly assigning assumed or fictitious causes of things, 
when we know that there are no causes of things in the first 
place. Scientists assume that this or that is so, and then they 
imagine that they have demonstrated a truth. They claim that 
if the centrifugal force ceased to act, the revolving body would 
drop to the central body at once. But most assuredly it would 
not — at least it never does. Besides, how could we ever stop or 
cancel a force ? A force can be deflected, but it cannot be di- 
minished or destroyed. Nothing can be diminished or destroyed. 

. Every landscape is simply a map ; the heavens above are for 
our eyes nothing more than a chart ; and like all maps, neither 
the landscape nor the heavens give us any true conception of 
either the size or distance of the objects presented to our view. 
In the case of the landscape, we never can tell how far the trees 
are from each other, nor how large they are, unless we approach 
quite near them. Indeed, size always varies with distance, and 
so we cannot say with propriet}^ that an object has any particu- 
lar size which is specially its own. The size of an object near by 
is only one of its sizes ; at ten feet it has a smaller size, and at a 
hundred feet one still smaller. At a mile it perhaps can hardly 
be seen, and then its size is that of a mere speck. So with the 
heavenly bodies. For us here below their size, distance and loca- 
tion are just what they appear to be to our mortal ken. What 
they may appear to be to our imagination after a series of 
mathematical calculations is made, is quite another matter. 
This imaginary size does not concern us in practice. All that 
we know of objects under any circumstances is how they appear 
to us. 

Time and distance, and eveu motion, are not things, nor are 
they in things. They are merely between things, and the ex- 



236 



THE VALUE OF ART. 



istence they enjoy is extremely precarious. You cannot see dis- 
tance ; you can only estimate it. You cannot see time ; you 
can calculate or count it. You cannot see size, nor form any 
clear notion of what or how it is. You may have your idea 
about the matter, and you cannot go beyond that. No two peo- 
ple agree in their estimates of size. How large or small an ob- 
ject may be, is largely a matter of guesswork at last. As to the 
distance of heavenly bodies from each other, how can we speak 
of such a relation ? Distance applies only to fixed points, but the 
heavenly bodies are constantly in motion. How could we apply 
the term distance to such bodies ? Distance is something that 
remains and is unchangeable. 

Time, distance, motion, quantity, number and dimensions 
have nothing to do with the character of objects. If a dollar 
expanded to twice its size, it would still be only a dollar ; and if it 
could repeat itself and become twenty, it would still remain a 
dollar, precisely as if it had merely changed its location. Re- 
peating and extending do not add to weight or power, nor do 
they develop any new characteristics. They are nothing but 
conceptions. 



CHAPTER XXXIII. 
THE VALUE OF ART. 

We would like to say something that would have a tendency 
to interest our readers in the subject of art, something that 
would enable them to understand its character and bring them 
to an appreciation of its merits higher than that which prevails 
among people at the present time. The opinion is far too com- 
mon among ordinary people that the productions of art come 
exclusively under the head of things ornamental, and that they 
do not properly belong in the category of things useful. 
This, so far as it exists, is a mistaken notion. 

The term art is applied very freely and often very inac- 
curately. Indeed it is like many other words, incapable of re- 
ceiving any precise or reliable definition. Art branches off into 
science, and it happens often that it cannot be distinguished 
from that branch. Without science to enable us to understand 
the nature, uses and capabilities of things, we should never have 



THE VALUE OF ART. 



237 



any demand for art. Art is what man has learned to do ; under 
the head of art, many of the most glorious achievements of . man 
are enumerated. The birds that build their nests and the bees 
that construct their cells have their arts as well as beings have 
that belong to a higher order. But usually when we speak of 
art we have in mind the works of man. Everything that man 
does comes properly in the domain of art, and what he accom- 
plishes is either well or ill done according as he does or does not 
understand his art. 

It is an art to make shoes, as well as to paint pictures, or to 
sing songs and dance jigs. There are the Mechanical Arts, which 
embrace what are usually spoken of as trades. These are known 
as the useful arts, in contradistinction to the other branches 
which are known as the Liberal or Fine Arts, embracing music, 
painting, sculpture and architecture. These are commonly sup- 
posed to be mainly ornamental in character, and as such they 
are to be either taken up or neglected according to the tastes or 
convenience of the individual. It is these so-called Liberal 
Arts, and especially Music, Dancing and Poetry to which we 
propose to give most of our attention in the discussion which we 
have now in view. We might notice in passing that art has 
been viewed differently among different peoples and at different 
periods of the world's history. In the Middle Ages the seven 
Liberal Arts were the following : Grammar, Rhetoric, Logic, 
Arithmetic, Music, Geometry and Astronomy. Of these seven 
we at the present time consider music alone as an art, and the 
remaining six come under the head of science. 

It is art chiefly that characterizes civilized life and distin- 
guishes it from life that is properly barbarous or uncivilized. 
The natives or aborigines of all countries, like the birds and 
beasts, their companions, have but few arts and those of the 
simplest character. They have but little knowledge of nature, 
but little science, and their disregard of art follows as a natural 
consequence. There are only a few things that they can do, be- 
cause there are so few things that they know. As they increase 
in knowledge, the arts are developed ; or to speak more accur- 
ately, science and art develop at one and the same time, and the 
one continually reacts upon the other. 

As a matter of fact, we could not have civilization without 
art ; it is by the productions of art alone that civilized countries 
become known. Their achievements in art are all they have to 
show ; it is by art simply that their progress is determined. 
What has Egypt left for us to wonder at or admire but works of 
art — its pyramids, its sculpture, its paintings, its architecture? 
Have Babylon and Nineveh left us anything more or anything 



338 



THE VALUE OF ART. 



less? What has kept Greece in such lasting remembrance with 
us, if not the perfection of its sculpture and architecture ? It is 
true that Greece gave us philosophy besides, as Rome gave us 
law and government, but these are of little account among the 
great masses of mankind compared with the splendid works of 
art. Art can be seen and appreciated ; philosophy and law are 
matters only for study and meditation. Men go to Rome to-day 
not to study law or government, but to see the Vatican and its 
treasures, to visit St. Peters and the Pantheon, to climb the 
stone seats of the Coliseum, to examine temples and arches and 
columns, to study paintings and view sculptured forms. Even 
art in ruins, as we find it in Rome, in Athens, in Thebes, in Pal- 
myra, in Persepolis, is far more attractive to the world, and more 
valuable, than philosophy in its most refined form or in its 
highest stage of development. And so when we cross the At- 
lantic and brave the perils of the deep in order to visit the 
modern cities of Europe, what is it that we go to study or ob- 
serve, if not what man has done in the line of art ? In Paris it 
is temples and palaces ; it is sculpture and paintings in their 
highest development ; it is fountains and arches and columns 
and avenues and parks. In London it is cathedrals, palaces and 
museums, with their wonderful treasures of art in all depart- 
ments ; and so in Berlin, St. Petersburg and Vienna we see the 
same class of things presented in new forms, with new beauties 
and new features of interest. On all sides and at every step 
what especially attracts our attention is some form, some produc- 
tion of art. 

There is no question at all that art, even in what is con- 
sidered its ornamental form, is highly • educational in its influ- 
ence upon the minds or hearts of mankind. It is well known 
that there is more of expression, more true revelation, in a paint- 
ing or a sculptured form than there is in a poem. The words in 
a poem give ideas, but they are always limited in scope and 
often misleading in the delineation attempted. A picture gives 
a far more accurate and more vivid description than is done by 
the printed page, and the same is true of sculptured forms. So 
again there is a wonderful amount of instruction in a work of 
architecture like the cathedrals of the Middle Ages in Europe 
and the temples and tombs of Egypt and the East. In the fullest 
sense of the term they are bound books, with the leaves spread 
open for the student to read. It is not well enough known, or if 
known, it is not sufficiently appreciated, that every painting and 
every sculptured figure or group, like that of Laocoon and his 
sons writhing in the folds of the monster, is a whole volume in 
itself. Paintings and sculptured forms have a story to tell, and 



THE VALUE OF ART. 



239 



if the work is well done, the story is uniformly well told. It is a 
great mistake on the part of the average man to think that books 
alone are the medium through which thoughts and ideas are 
communicated. Thoughts and ideas are conveyed by signs and 
gestures, and stories are told in the drama and even in music, 
particularly in the form of opera. No, the value of art lies in 
the expression which it gives to thought and conception, and its 
chief importance is found in its wonderful influence upon char- 
acter. 

There is no question but that it would be better for this 
world, far better, if more attention were given to the study of 
art in common life and less attention to the accumulation of 
wealth. Instead of striving to surpass or subdue our fellow men, 
let us strive to render the world more beautiful, more attractive 
and more interesting than it is to those with whom we associate. 
By advancing art in this way, we would do far more for the 
world and for its improvement than we could by bestowing gifts 
inconsiderately upon undeserving recipients. Nature has done 
its full share ; it has adorned the fields and forests with beautiful 
and interesting objects, and having done this, it has left the rest 
for man to do. Why should men, enlightened and intelligent 
men, continue to be so remiss in the performance of this im- 
portant part of their duty ? We have beautiful birds and flowers 
and shrubs given to us. Why should we not go on and fill the 
world with our own attractive productions — with beautiful 
homes, beautiful lawns and parks, beautiful etchings and paint- 
ings and statuary ? Why should we not have music and dancing 
in every family ? Why is so little attention given to these in- 
expensive and yet essential recreations? It is hard to explain 
why. Certain it is that if we had more music, more dancing, 
more poetry and more art of all kinds, we should have more 
contentment and enjoyment, and doubtless far less of misery 
and crime. Let us cultivate art not so much as a source of en- 
joyment as a source of education and advancement, — in other 
words, for its effect upon the soul. 



There is far more in art than people generally suppose. As 
already intimated, the productions of art are properly not imita- 
tions but creations. A composition in music is a creation ; a 
painting is a creation, and a statue is a creation. A piece of 
poetry is likewise a creation. They are all something new, they 
are products direct from man's mental workshop. We have al- 



240 



THE VALUE OF ART. 



ways considered that art deserves encouragement in all its de- 
partments, and it is well worth the attention of every intelligent 
being. As a diversion, it is far better than the pursuit of pleas- 
ure or the acquisition of wealth. In fact if people would do 
more that is proper and sensible, they would find less time to de- 
vote to crime and folly. The mind will always be occupied with 
some particular object that commands the attention — if not with 
something sensible, then with something worthless ; if not with 
something worthy, then with something wicked ; if not with 
valuable thoughts, then with wild dreams and absurd visions. 
There is no doubt that very much of our crime arises from 
the desire of having something to do : and even the desire of con- 
quest and the continued accumulation of wealth, long after the 
need of money has disappeared, result from the same cause. 
People must always find something to operate upon, and why 
does not art in its various developments open by far the most 
desirable field for suitable employment ? 

We have always looked upon dancing as an art that is de- 
serving of much more attention than it receives. Most people 
have not a proper appreciation of its character and value, and 
therefore it is somewhat in disrepute. But that of itself proves 
nothing. Many vocations that we now consider worthy, if not 
honorable, have been, at different periods of the world's history, 
considered anything but respectable employments. In the Mid- 
dle Ages a merchant or a trader held rather a low rank, and in 
some countries to-day the priest and the schoolmaster are usually 
neglected. In Germany the barber was the surgeon and blood- 
letter. And with us to-day, a man who follows a trade is sup- 
posed to stand lower than one who has a profession ; or, in other 
words, an impecunious lawyer stands higher in society than a 
prosperous and progressive blacksmith. As we have intimated, 
all this proves nothing — except that it is the fashion. In reality 
any one business or any one occupation is just as proper and 
creditable as any other. It is all in the man. So it is in danc- 
ing. There is no question but that it should rank as an art with 
music, and certainly with painting and sculpture. It is not in- 
dispensable. Neither are they. Music has its uses and its value, 
and so has dancing. 

The true nature of dancing is little understood, and its place 
in nature as one of the agencies having an influence upon the 
development of man is not duly estimated by the public. Danc- 
ing is one thing, and dances as we have them to-day are quite 
another thing. When we speak of dancing as something to be 
approved of and encouraged, we have in mind dancing as it ex- 
isted in the earlier ages, and as it still exists in many countries, 



15 



THE VALUE OF ART. 



241 



and not dances and balls as we have them at the present time. 
The latter have become evils, not from dancing as an art, but 
from the manner in which dancing is conducted and the results 
that follow. Dancing is not necessarily an all night affair. It 
may occur in the afternoon, or at least in the early evening, as it 
does in southern Europe and throughout the East. It need not 
be in a closed or over-heated room. Most of the dancing of for- 
mer ages was on the lawn under the shade of trees, as it is to-day 
in nearly all warm countries. 

Again, dancing is not necessarily a social affair ; it has noth- 
ing more to do with love and amours necessarily than sculpture 
has, or music or poetry. It is by no means necessary that the 
two sexes should take part in the same dance — they may and 
they may not. according to circumstances. In ancient Greece 
the men and women did not join in their dances. When the 
Dervishes dance in the East to-day, it is the men alone that take 
part in the exercise. In its origin dancing was a religious cere- 
mony, as painting, music and sculpture were, at one time, exclus- 
ively religious arts. Dancing in some form seems to be common 
in all religions. The Israelites danced around the golden calf ; 
David danced before the ark. The Greeks danced everywhere 
and on any pretext. They danced in the temples, the woods, the 
fields. In the early centuries of Christianity sacred dancing was 
encouraged by the church. Even the angels danced, it was sup- 
posed. And to-day we ourselves have the May-pole dance. 

Dancing should be a private, and even a family affair, con- 
fined to small gatherings, at proper times and in proper places. 
Dancing may be an individual performance, but it is more inter- 
esting to dance with one or more companions, as in music it is 
more agreeable to sing or play in concert with others than alone. 
Association affords a certain support and encouragement, and in 
all cases to act in harmony with others will be found to have a 
wholesome educational influence. It is the same in conversa- 
tion. A person may talk to himself, but if he talks with others 
he has an opportunity to learn and thus he may improve. 

We encourage dancing as a custom for its healthful in- 
fluence upon character and conduct. It is a delightful exercise,- 
a pleasing and innocent pastime to begin with. It develops a 
love for harmony and creates an interest in the beautiful and 
the good. It cultivates the graces and improves the disposition. 
It leads to an interest in music : indeed, music and dancing are 
always associated together. They are both matters of measure 
and time, and they both depend upon harmony for their princi- 
pal effect. People who devote a portion of their time to music 



242 



THE VALUE OF ART. 



and dancing, have less attention to give to things that are vain 
and unworthy. 

Finally, dancing, where it is well executed, is beautiful as a 
spectacle — no athletic performance can be more so. Those who 
can dance well, and with becoming grace, have certainly one 
accomplishment of which they may be proud. Nothing pleases 
the eye and delights the soul more than the poetry and rhythm 
of motion. Dancing is also an expression of feeling and senti- 
ment, far more so than either music or painting. Dancing rep- 
resents movement — music and painting cannot do so, certainly 
they cannot with any success. Dancing often degenerates into 
pantomime. The female figure in dancing is charming to the eye 
of the most common observer. Nothing pleases so highly as 
graceful movement. The gently flowing robe that woman wears 
serves to heighten the effect of her dancing. It is in the ballet 
dance alone that she appears hideous. She ought to conceal her 
shapeless limbs, instead of exposing them as she does in this in- 
stance. Man is a most unfortunate animal, because he is obliged 
to wear trousers. What a ridiculous figure he always makes ! 
And when he dances, we always feel that if he could only hide 
those big feet and queer shaped legs in some way, how fortunate 
for him it would be ! How much better would he appear if clad 
in the simple dress of the East or wearing the old Roman toga '? 



All art is composition, and all composition, whatever be its 
character or purpose, may be called art. Art is a combining 
of elements or factors and so bringing them together and arrang- 
ing them as to produce some contemplated effect. All language 
is art, and in some of its developments it belongs to the highest 
forms of art. Language is simply a form or medium of expres- 
sion. So a poem is a piece of art, music is an art, among the 
most important of all the arts. And the same may be said of 
architecture. In all forms of art we have composition, a com- 
bination of parts so arranged as to produce a certain effect or to 
render a certain expression. A poem expresses, music expresses, 
and so a statue expresses, and a structure or building also ex- 
presses. They all influence the emotions and impel men to 
action. It is through art that men are largely influenced ; and 
through art exclusively, in some of its phases, men acquire their 
education. If nothing was expressed and nothing indicated, 
there would never be anything known. Education itself is an 
art ; indeed, all that man does or accomplishes comes, properly 
speaking, in the domain of art. 



THE VALUE OF ART. 



243 



Iii the early ages of the Greeks, as well as of other peoples, 
the multitude received its education mainly through music, 
poetry, the drama and sculpture. Whatever tends to influence 
the character and conduct of men and impels them in some new 
direction may be considered educational. Art may be said to 
imply genius, for without genius nothing can ever be achieved 
by art. There are high and low orders of art, as there are high 
and low orders of genius. 

True art is never ornament ; art properly speaking has noth- 
ing to do with ornament. True art is never pasted on ; it is 
something independent in itself. Incidentally a flower adorns a 
a lawn, but that is not really its office. A picture may be an 
ornament, but it is never an appendage. It always has a place 
of its own. Should we call a cathedral of the Middle Ages an 
ornament to a town simply because it is beautiful or imposing ? 
Shall we call a horse or a bird an ornament because of its attrac- 
tive features ? 

It is a serious mistake to confound art with ornament in any 
case. We treat it as a luxury, when it is really a necessity. 
Through art alone man makes himself manifest. Art is man's 
own creation ; through art men make themselves equal with the 
gods. It is a great mistake — though the idea prevails generally 
— for any one to imagine that art is purely imitative, and that 
all that we do is to copy nature. True art is never imitative ; 
it is in the highest sense creative. What is called transfer work, 
or copying in any form, or even photographic work, cannot be 
called art, except to a very limited extent, in the manipulation 
of plates. These effects are not produced ; they are simply 
copies or reprints. The painting by a true artist is never a copy, 
it is not a likeness properly called. It is ideal, and is practically 
a creation of the artist. It is not a second being that he pro- 
duces, but a new being of his own is presented on canvas. It is 
the artist's own conception. Two different artists treat the same 
subject differently, and of course with entirely different results. 
People see things differently, and hence two artists paint things 
differently. A Greek statue is not a copy ; it is not even a like- 
ness. It is the creation of some artist. It was in creation that 
the greatness of Phidias lay, as it was in creation that the great- 
ness of Michael Angelo was found. 

Science is to know; art is to do, and to know how to do. 
To live, and to know how to live, is an art — the highest of all 
arts. Indeed this art includes all other arts. 



It is remarkable that in a country like ours, where so much 



244 



THE VALUE OF ART. 



is expended upon education, so little attention should be given to 
such a subject as music. The fact is that in America the value 
and importance of music is but imperfectly understood, and too 
few appreciate the powerful educational influence which music 
exerts for good upon the masses of mankind. Much less atten- 
tion is given in this country to the study and practice of music, 
either vocal or instrumental, than in any other civilized land. We 
have a few good musicians, but many of these are either foreign- 
ers or the descendants of foreigners. The Germans are far above 
and beyond us in musical acquirements and so are the Italians. 
Music is a part of the ordinary education of the children in 
Italy, France and Germany, and for a long time music also 
flourished in the Netherlands. 

What we need in this country is to have music popularized. 
It is something for every family, and not for a few amateurs 
and professionals. Music should be taught in our schools, as it is 
in Germany, at least in its elements. It is an acquirement that 
deserves to be encouraged by the state, as it is in Europe. It is 
something that should be a part of every child's education, as 
much as either grammar or penmanship. Of course we should 
not expect everybody to excel as musicians ; neither do we ex- 
pect all pupils to excel in any branch of education in school. 
Every one familiar with history is aware of the fact that in 
Greece music as a part of the people's education was considered 
of the highest importance, and the same is true of the Egyptians 
and other ancient peoples. 

The affinity between music and poetry is well known. It is 
the measure, the rhythm, in both that pleases the ear and stirs 
the soul. The same is true of dancing, with which music has 
always been closely connected. During the early centuries of 
our era, music was one of the most powerful and important 
agencies employed in the service of the church. Indeed, there 
can be no true religion without both poetry and music. They 
both affect the soul as no other influence does. The Hebrews 
were not only an emotional and superstitious people, but they 
were also a musical people. We might add that in the Middle 
Ages, in Europe, music was chiefly vocal, instrumental music 
being little known and rarely practiced. 

Martin Luther says, "Music is one of the best of arts. The 
notes make the text living. I give to music, after theology, the 
next place and the highest honor." Buckle, in his History of Civ- 
ilization says : "In very early culture periods, and before people 
were acquainted with the use of letters, there was felt the need 
of something to enliven their leisure moments, and in war to 
stimulate their courage. This need was satisfied by the dis- 



A NEW VIEW OF CIVILIZATION. 



245 



co very of ballads, and these form the groundwork of all histori- 
cal knowledge. They were sung by all classes of men whose 
particular business it was to preserve traditions for posterity." 
If the world had had no music, we should have no early history, 
because it would not be preserved. Buckle continues: "The 
jingle pleases the ear of the barbarian and affords a security that 
he will hand his story down to his children in an unimpaired 
state. This guarantee against error increases still farther the 
value of these ballads." 



CHAPTER XXXIV. 
A NEW VIEW OF CIVILIZATION. 

All civilization comes from the city ; if people lived in the 
country only and were all either herdsmen or agriculturists, we 
should never have what might properly be called civilization. 
The very name itself, derived as it is from civis, a citizen, or 
civitas, a city or a state, indicates that it was originally a matter 
of cities. Civilization implies many elements or factors that are 
contemporaneous in their action — among these being private 
property, education, wealth, government, religion, and above all 
a settled place of abode and an established mode of life. These 
conditions are met with in the city, but they do not exist in a 
country or pastoral life, where people change their place of resi- 
dence regularly. Civilization is necessarily a matter of contact 
and friction. It is even a matter of conflict and competition. 
One man living alone would never become civilized, no matter 
how great his capabilities might be naturally. Without contact 
with those better than himself, or wiser, he could never im- 
prove. All our improvement comes from contact with others 
who have knowledge and who have had advantages that we do 
not possess. No man teaches himself— all education must come 
from or through external influences. A man to learn must have 
the help of instruments, and in order to advance in any way, he 
must have some assistance from those who are more gifted or 
better informed than himself. Slaves learn rapidly from their 
masters, but masters learn little or nothing from their slaves. 
Hence, in subjugating inferior races, it is the conquered always 
that improve, while the conqueror deteriorates. 

Men begin to advance only when they associate together and 
live in groups ; when they have become scattered or they wander 



246 



A NEW VIEW OF CIVILIZATION. 



about, they either retrograde or remain stationary. Again, we 
repeat, men can have civilization only when they begin to found 
cities. And where were cities originally located ? Where the 
topography of the country and the advantages of climate and 
commerce favored them. Cities are founded exclusively upon 
commerce, and it is through this instrumentality alone that 
cities become rich and powerful. Cities, like individuals, do not 
evolve riches from themselves, but they secure their wealth ex- 
clusively from outside sources. 

The cities of ancient times were generally found in fertile 
valleys, along rivers which were the avenues over which the pro- 
ducts of the country were brought. Nineveh and Babylon of old 
were in the valley of the Tigris and Euphrates, and Thebes was 
in the valley of the Nile. Many cities like Damascus, Baalbec 
and Bagdad were on the routes of caravans, and they gained 
their wealth and importance from that source. But the most 
famous cities of the past were maritime cities, and their wealth 
was acquired through the commerce that was carried on with 
the people of distant lands. We might name Venice, in this 
connection, also Genoa, Naples, Rome, Athens, Alexandria, Bey- 
rout, Smyrna, Tyre, Rhodes, and other cities less known, or at 
least not so well remembered. 

The course which civilization followed, along or around the 
Mediterranean, has now been fairly well ascertained. It started, 
so far as we are concerned, in Asia Minor, in the valley of the 
Tigris and Euphrates, where Babylon and Nineveh arose. This 
was not far from the eastern shores of the Mediterranean, and to 
these shores their influence and conquests were soon extended. 
Under this influence the Phenicians eventually developed into a 
progressive and powerful people. About the same time, or at 
some other time not very remote, the Egyptians came into 
prominence, and by this people civilization was ultimately 
carried to a higher state of development. 

Greece got her lessons unquestionably from Egypt an I 
Phenicia — just how much from one and how much from the 
other, is not now known. Greece took up the lessons she had 
received and from them remarkable results were obtained. To 
this day she is the instructress of the world in philosophy and 
art, and even in science and religion. There is very little that 
we have learned that Greece did not know two thousand years 
ago and over. The authentic history of Greece dates from 770 
B. C, when the country consisted of a number of unimportant 
little states. The history of Athens, so far as it is known to be 
authentic, dates from 680 B. C. , and for several hundred years 
it ran along with its variations and vicissitudes till long after 



A NEW VIEW OF CIVILIZATION. 



247 



Christ, — at one time independent, and at another occupied by the 
Persians ; for a time under the rule of the Spartans, later coming 
under the yoke of Macedonia, and finally becoming a mere 
province of Rome — but with all these changes, still exercising a 
remarkable influence upon the civilized world through the 
agency of its literature and art. Indeed, the occupation by the 
Roman emperors served to give it more eclat than it had be- 
fore, and it became the source of learning and of instruction 
in art till well along in the Christian era. 

What were the conditions that rendered Athens so famous 
and gave it such great renown throughout the civilized world ? 
How did this city become so enlightened and finally so eminent? 
The settled portions of Greece constituted only a limited terri- 
tory, and Athens was never a city of more than 25,000 freemen, 
under whom were held 400,000 helots or slaves. But the Athen- 
ians had become, through their arts and abilities, rich and in- 
fluential. All the men were gentlemen of leisure, and they de- 
voted themselves chiefly to music, art, discussion, legislation and 
the study of philosophy. It is only men who are situated as 
they were that could afford to pursue such a course of life. Men 
who have a living to earn and are obliged to work have but little 
time and less inclination for study and inquiry. Such people 
never become learned, and they cannot be called enlightened in 
the proper sense of the term. 

Athens rose above all other cities as the sun of civilization, 
sending forth its rays to enlighten and vivify the countries com- 
ing within its sphere of influence. Colonies were planted along 
the shores and on the islands of the Mediterranean, and even in 
Italy, a country which lay near at hand. Naples was founded 
by Greeks, and Sicily had many Greek settlements. As Greece 
brought its civilization from the East originally, so it afterwards 
returned it to the East in an improved form. Through Alex- 
ander and his conquests Grecian civilization was carried back 
into Asia Minor, over into India, and finally into Egypt where 
Alexandria was founded and a seat of learning was established. 
There were no railroads or telegraphs in those days, and so all 
intercourse with neighbors was carried on with boats, upon 
rivers and on the sea. Hence civilizing influences were confined 
mainly to the shores of the Mediterranean and they rarely ex- 
tended far inland. But vessels possessed of both size and 
speed have been in use not only for hundreds but for thousands 
of„years, and to go from Greece to any country on the southern 
or eastern side of the Mediterranean implies a journey of only a 
few days. It must also be remembered that Asia Minor and 
Egypt are very near to Athens, and that Italy is nearer still. 



248 



A NEW VIEW OF CIVILIZATION. 



To-day it is only a day's passage from Patras in Greece to Brin- 
disi in Italy. 

To make progress in science and art, or in other words in 
civilization, or even in wealth, does not require great numbers 
in population, or even a great extent of territory. Greece, as we 
have noticed, was insignificant in both these respects. So Ven- 
ice was only a single city, but it gained both power and wealth, 
and it also made great advancement in the arts and in civiliza- 
tion. Genoa is another instance, and Rome is another. Baby- 
lon and Palmyra, and even Thebes and Carthage, afford further 
illustrations in the same direction. Palestine was also small, 
even insignificant in point of territory, and yet its religion and 
philosophy subdued the world, with the powerful aid, be it re- 
membered, of the Roman emperors. 

How did the continent of Europe become civilized and 
finally enlightened? Wholly through contact with the Romans 
and finally through the subjugation effected by the armies of 
that warlike and aggressive people. It is perhaps true that no 
people can become fully enlightened and develop a philosophy or 
religion of their own without passing through a period of slavery 
under the dominion of a race stronger and more advanced than 
"themselves. This was the history of every one of the countries 
of Europe. It was the history also of Greece, of Egypt and of 
the Israelites. The enlightened and the unenlightened con- 
tinually act and react upon each other. They are complements, 
and each one implies the existence of the other. 

The primary characteristic in the history of races is igno- 
rance. If people were not ignorant, they could not learn, and 
hence they could not advance. Rome was overthrown by the 
ignorant and barbarous peoples whom it had first conquered and 
then instructed. It is fated that the sons, or the grandsons, of 
masters shall themselves become slaves, and that the sons of 
slaves, or the grandsons, shall themselves become masters in 
their turn. This phenomenon will be found repeated over and 
over again in the history of the world. Rome conquered and 
educated the Goths and Vandals of northern Europe, and they 
in turn overran the provinces of the Roman empire and became 
the masters of the very people who centuries before had subju- 
gated them. The Moors held Spain over 700 years, but they 
were at last overwhelmed by the descendants of those whom 
they had formerly subdued and oppressed, and as fugitives they 
-were driven back into the deserts of Africa whence they came. 

But is civilization worth the price that it costs ? Is it a bless- 
ing to a man or an evil ? As a question, this is identical with 
another question: Is slavery a blessing? Certain it is, as 



A NEW VIEW OF CIVILIZATION. 



249 



already intimated, that civilization cannot be attained without 
passing through a probationary state of slavery. And civiliza- 
tion itself is only a state of slavery in a modified form. Even 
knowledge tends to make men autocratic and imperious, because 
knowledge is power. Knowledge gives men strength, and 
strength leads to conquest. The ignorant are always weak, and 
they are peculiarly liable to be taken at a disadvantage. Know- 
ledge makes men confident and bold ; ignorance makes them 
timid and suspicious. It will be remembered that God con- 
demned our first parents simply because they wanted to get 
knowledge. Why did he do so ? And yet we, in our present 
civilized state, spend our whole life in trying to get knowledge ! 

Civilization is disease. Its career is that of man in his de- 
clining years. It is the last chapter in the book — it is the end of 
the series. After civilization comes chaos, and finally darkness 
and barbarism once more. Thus far in the history of the world 
no nation has ever yet survived its civilization, or passed beyond 
the limits that civilization had attained. Civilization ends in 
dissolution. 

Civilization means progress and progress means discontent 
and dissatisfaction. Civilization means the continued develop- 
ment of new desires, and where one desire is satisfied a dozen 
new desires are sure to arise in its place. Hence- people in the 
civilized state are never contented. They are always complain- 
ing of their ills and misfortunes, their diseases and afflictions. 
They adore the doctors as they do their Saviour, and the apoth- 
ecary shop they regard as something indispensable. They buy 
syrup by the case and pills in quantities. They imagine that 
they would surely die if they were not perpetually "taking 
something." They doctor not only the body but also the mind, 
the soul. They doctor the laws, they doctor the state, doctor 
everything. They consider every change an improvement, simply 
because it is a change. 

Things are not thus among the barbarous races, or with men 
in the natural state. These people take things as they come, and 
they are not continually doctoring. They have some simple 
remedies, as the lower animals have theirs. These remedies 
are known to all alike and they are as free as the air they 
breathe. They take their remedies as they take their food, not 
because it is fashionable, but because they desire it, and instinct 
teaches them that it is what they need. In a state of barbarism 
it is health and vigor that prevails ; in a state of civilization 
corruption and decay are always found to be common. In the 
civilized state, men rise to fall, and when they fall, they rise no 
more. There may be a happy land of Canaan beyond the realms 
of civilization, but no one as yet has been so fortunate as to 
reach it, or even to discover its location. 



CHAPTER XXXV. 



4 

THE TRUE POLICY. 



Every man should have some place of residence, some group 
or family with which he is identified. He should by no means 
be allowed, as he is now, to go when he pleases and where he 
pleases. Our frequent changes of place are peculiar to modern 
times. In other days every man lived in some place and some- 
thing was known of his character and antecedents. There was 
some family group responsible for his misdoings and ready to 
protect and defend him when danger threatened. Most of our 
social troubles, and a large share of our crimes, arise from this 
freedom of travel, as well as from the ease with which strangers 
can obtrude themselves upon new communities. It was not so 
in the old German days, when no stranger was received unless 
some one vouched for him. He was not allowed to transact busi- 
ness with the natives. A stranger in those days stood very much 
in the relation of an enemy, as he does still with the Arabs and 
robbers generally. In Rome the foreigner was denied the right 
of making purchases, and he was excluded from business of most 
kinds. There was no mancipation or nexum for him. The Roman 
law was for Romans only. A foreigner could not be a witness. 
With strangers business was formless, and money down. In- 
deed, this principle of receiving strangers with caution is well 
known in certain departments even now. When a new name 
is proposed in any of our societies, a committee is appointed and 
a careful inquiry is made into the standing, character and his- 
tory of the candidate. Why should not precisely the same pre- 
cautions be taken, in some way, whenever a stranger presents 
himself for admission into any community? When so many 
rascals are abroad, we have a perfect right to assume that every 
stranger is a rascal , until he furnishes evidence to prove the con- 
trary. If this simple and perfectly practicable precaution were 



THE TRUE POLICY. 



251 



taken, that step alone would prevent nine-tenths of our crimes. 
If a man were known to be a dangerous person, or a scoundrel, 
we would certainly keep out of his way. We would not allow 
him in our midst for any considerable time. Every man should 
expect to live upon the record or reputation that he has already 
made. 

Every man should have not only a home but a business or 
vocation of some kind, and some certain means of making a 
good, honest living. This would of itself dispose of the tramp 
nuisance, and if there were dependents of any kind, they would 
consist of only the disabled and helpless, who should always be 
cared for by the family or group to which they belong. This is 
no new idea. It is as old as the world. The new idea lies wholly 
in the irregular, unbusinesslike way in which communities are 
now managed. There is nothing safe, sensible or substantial in 
our present methods of conducting our business affairs. Instead 
of closing the bars and keeping the rascals out, we leave all the 
bars down and permit the worst of the race to come in at 
pleasure. Instead of trying to discover methods by which crime 
and suffering could be prevented, men content themselves with 
merely inflicting certain punishments upon those who are so un- 
fortunate as to be detected. And so we do in all the walks of 
life. We never study to prevent misfortunes. 

Traveling as we have it at the present day, to see sights or to 
gratify a feeling of restlessness, should be discouraged. Little 
good can come from this practice. Tf all men had a home and 
the certainty of a fair living, there would be no inducement for 
them to wander. Let men settle down and cultivate a spirit of 
contentment and repose, and then we shall have far less of 
wretchedness and crime than at present. We shall have no 
vagabonds, if we do not make laws by which such creatures are 
developed. In Europe the tramp has been known for centuries, 
and where poverty reigns, there tramps are sure to abound. The 
tramp presents in himself one of the forms which poverty as- 
sumes, and poverty, every enlightened inquirer knows, is not so 
much the result of indolence, intemperance and wastefulness, as 
of our unequal and unjust laws. When the time comes that we 
shall be just and kind to all men, then we shall have far less 
poverty and destitution, and, with the disappearance of these 
evils, we shall cease to be troubled with the beggar and the 
tramp. 

There should be but little travel for the purposes of trade 
and commerce. Those things can be of service only when men, 
or groups of men, seek to become rich and powerful. Simply to 
supply our needs, when society is founded upon a proper basis, 



252 



THE TRUE POLICY. 



would require but a small amount of either trade or commerce. 
The number of things from abroad that we really need is very- 
small. If every community were self-supporting, as it should 
be. there would be little occasion for intercourse with either 
neighboring or distant communities. What is needed for sub- 
sistence and the ordinary comforts, people should have at their 
command and near their own door. The old way, antiquated as 
it may seem now, was the best way. Considering the interests 
of all concerned, the present system of dividing labor and con- 
fining each individual, or each community, to some one opera- 
tion, or some one department, is not productive of the most good 
or the most contentment for society. When each family sup- 
plied its own wants, provided its own food, made its own cloth- 
ing, and its own implements to a large extent, it really came 
nearer to fulfilling its mission upon earth than it does under the 
present system. Through the medium of commerce, we obtain 
luxuries, but luxuries, it is well known, never improve the con- 
dition of mankind. Their presence, on the contrary, is a sign of 
decline and decay. When they absorb a large share of the at- 
tention of a people, it may be safely concluded that the end is 
not distant. Men lived originally, it is true, in a very primitive 
style, but to our mind, judging from all the evidence to be ob- 
tained, that seems better than our present method, even with 
our modern improvements. It is plain enough that men need 
pure air, plain food and a fair amount of exercise, for the good 
of both body and mind. Those things they had in early days, 
but they do not have them, in most cases, now. 

Whatever is done in a community should be done openly and 
without any attempt at concealment. Privacy affords the oppor- 
tunity for a large portion of our crimes and misdemeanors. If 
people did everything openly, very few things would happen in 
opposition to public opinion. But as it is now, we not only offer 
every opportunity but an actual inducement for people to com- 
mit crime. A man's house is his castle, according to our present 
antiquated legal theories, and in this he can carry on any wick- 
edness that he chooses. But the better way would be to have 
every man's house open to his neighbors and friends at all times, 
and then the community might feel certain that no wrongs were 
being perpetrated there. No man has a right to do anything in 
secret. A desire for secrecy is an indication of itself that some- 
thing is wrong. No man should do what he is ashamed of. 

Every one should be able to give an account of his steward- 
ship at any time. He should be able to account for every dollar 
that he receives or expends, and he should have nothing in his 
possession except that which has come to him rightfully. If 



THE TRUE POLICY. 



253 



every man had to account for all he had accumulated, he would 
never have anything that did not properly belong to him. It 
would be no object to him to make unlawful gains in any way, 
because he could never use them. Why then should he commit 
crime ? What benefit could he derive from it ? But what we are 
now advocating is just the opposite of what is being practiced 
throughout the civilized world. What is being done is to pro- 
vide every facility for the commission of wrongs. With the pri- 
vacy to which men are now entitled, they have every oppor- 
tunity to carry out their schemes. We allow them to carry fire- 
arms and destructive weapons of all kinds, and thus we pave the 
way for murders, robberies and crimes generally. 

The very moment we make concealment impracticable or 
impossible, crime must disappear. Crime is so very common in 
the cities chiefly because concealment there is so easy, and detec- 
tion is so difficult. If every man had a fixed habitation, if his 
source of livelihood were known to all ; if his character and 
habits were a matter of record, and if his whole life were open 
to the public, or rather to his neighbors about him, how could he 
lead a life of crime? Again, if the doctrine of confidence and 
neighborly friendship prevailed ; if every man had all the privi- 
leges that were accorded to those around him ; if he were certain 
of food, clothing and the enjoyment of peace under all circum- 
stances ; if he saw no great value in money and no opportunity 
to secure exceptional advantages from its possession, what in- 
ducement could there be for him to be guilty of wrongs of any 
kind? Thirst for money, habits of intemperance, belief in re- 
venge, a desire for rank, together with the carnal appetite, are 
among the chief causes that produce crime. But if money 
ceases to have any special importance, if intemperance disap- 
pears, if revenge is discountenanced, if the rank is the same for 
all, and finally, if the relation of the sexes is left more to nature 
and less to the state and the caprice of men, why should not 
crimes be unknown? 

The reader need hardly be reminded, in conclusion, that the 
author of this work is opposed to cities and towns. To carry out 
his plan of life successfully implies small and well-ordered 
communities. Being opposed to wealth, he would necessarily 
be opposed to cities, for without wealth there would be no cities, 
as without cities there could be no real wealth. Civilization it- 
self is a matter of cities ; it is with cities that civilization takes 
its rise, and with their fall the decline of civilization comes. 



CHAPTER XXXVI. 



CONCLUDING REMARKS. 

Thus far in this work we have discussed principles and con- 
sidered their application in everyday life. Now. in conclusion, 
we will present some of these principles again, this time in a 
more condensed, more direct and more tangible form than be- 
fore, keeping constantly in view the Problem of Life and seek- 
ing to establish such a line of conduct as is safe for every man to 
follow. An old idea presented in a new form is, for all practi- 
cal purposes, a new idea. All there is of an idea lies in its ex- 
pression. 

It is the confident belief of the author of this work that 
reason is a reliable guide in all the affairs of mankind. But be- 
fore people can reason they must have knowledge, just as they 
must have light before they can see. As no man can see in 
darkness, so no man can reason in ignorance. To know, a man 
must feel ; in fact, to know, to think and to feel are all one and 
the same thing. A man progresses in knowledge according as he 
advances in experience — never any faster, and usually not any 
slower. Men learn from their own experience, their own percep- 
tions and feelings. What others have seen and what others may 
know avails us little. All our knowledge is nothing but feeling 
that has been elaborated in some way. That which does not feel 
does not think, does not suffer. To have painful feelings is the 
penalty to be paid for knowing and thinking. Trees and plants 
do not suffer, because they do not think or feel ; and animals and 
savages suffer less than the civilized — they have less trouble in 
every direction — simply because they know less and think less 
than the civilized races. When we sleep, we do not suffer, be- 
cause we neither think nor feel. Feeling is not in the body, but 
in the mind, and were it otherwise a corpse would feel as the liv- 
ing feel. But it must be borne in mind that there are compensa- 



CONCLUDING REMARKS. 



255 



tions in this world for all our so-called misfortunes. Our enjoy- 
ments come from the same source that our sufferings come — 
from knowledge and feeling. If trees do not suffer, they do not 
enjoy ; and if animals and the ignorant races suffer less than we 
do, they also have fewer enjoyments. But when we start out in 
the pursuit of knowledge, we should be careful that what we 
secure is of the right kind. A light that leads us in the wrong 
direction — into mishaps and disaster— is much worse than no 
light at all. 



In starting out to lay clown Rules of Life it is difficult to 
decide which is most important and which therefore is entitled 
to be placed at the head of the list. Rules of life are not really 
fit subjects for comparison, one being as important as another 
and therefore one being as much entitled to recognition as an- 
other. However, the author considers it not amiss to begin with 
urging a due recognition of the usefulness and importance of 
labor in all the walks of life. Labor, a moderate amount of 
activity and exertion, instead of being a curse to a man is a 
blessing. It is man's most inestimable privilege. Labor is im- 
perative and indispensable. Exercise may be considered a curse 
to man only when it takes the form of a task and man himself 
becomes a slave. Exercise is painful and fatiguing only so far 
as we consider it so, make it so. There can be no true satisfac- 
tion in repose. There is no progress to be made and no achieve- 
ment to be attained through indolence. Achievements are 
always the result of effort. Nothing can be more vain, more 
idle, than the wish for nothing to do. or the desire for mere 
amusement. 

Safest of all rules it is, never to devote yourself to a life of 
pleasure. Pleasure is a costly and deceptive pearl, and you are 
sure to miss it in the end. The life of a sober and sensible man 
is immeasurably better at all times than that of one who makes 
it a business to seek pleasure. 

Persevere in whatever you undertake, but always keep your 
head cool, and never make a fuss about anything. Never count 
the minutes and the hours. The operation is fatiguing, and it is 
not worth the effort. There is always time enough, if you will 
only be patient. 

Remember that there are no trifles. A thing is not a trifle 
merely because it is small. If size were a measure of value, a 
granite boulder would be worth more than the most valuable 
diamond. The greatest mistake that a man ever makes is when 



256 



CONCLUDING REMARKS. 



he disregards little things. The world is made up of little things 
— of mere trifles, as many people are disposed to consider them. 

Present a firm and resolute front on all important occasions, 
but do not stand too much upon punctilio or show yourself too 
great a stickler for what you consider your rights and privileges. 
If you respect yourself, you will be respected by others. If you 
deem it expedient or necessary to pay tribute or taxes, do so 
always under protest. Do not say it is right when you know it 
is wrong. It is not right to be called upon to pay either tribute 
or taxes. Every man should pay his own obligations and leave 
others to pay theirs. 

Acknowledge no man as master, and assume no authority 
over others. Neither judge nor allow yourself to be judged. 
The more you act as you wish to act, the less you will act like 
some one else. 

Do your own work and rarely associate yourself with others 
in any venture. In all associations some one must expect to 
suffer wrong, and perhaps meet with humiliation at last. 

Respect those that deserve respect, but do no reverence to 
any man. Never be on intimate terms with any one. Too much 
reverence spoils people, as too much tenderness spoils children. 
We do not advocate a strenuous life, but every one should be 
ready to meet difficulties, and even to endure hardships, when- 
ever they are encountered. 

Nothing is so silly and so unworthy of a sensible man as to 
seek revenge for injuries suffered or for insults offered. It is 
even unmanly for one to so far lose his self-control as to become 
angry. 

Never depend for one moment upon such uncertain factors 
as luck, fortune, favors, protection, or upon the whims of men, 
or even upon Providence. Depend upon yourself at all times — 
the only reliable coadjutor that any one can have. 

Never follow fashion merely because it is fashion. Have a 
will and mind of your own, as well as some definite purpose in 
life. It is not well to be too apprehensive of what people think 
and say. What people think and say proves nothing. The best 
of men may be, and often are, wrong in their conclusions. 

Never accept gifts of any value, for they will usually be 
found to be bribes in a disguised form. No man ever gives with- 
out having some special design. You cannot afford to be obli- 
gated in any such manner. 

Never accept a truth merely because it is old. On the con- 
trary, age is often a good reason for its rejection. Truth, like 
garments, at last wears out. Like bread, even the best of bread, 
truth becomes stale with age. 

* 16 



CONCLUDING REMARKS. 



257 



It is well to listen to what people say, but never let them get 
the impression that you are afraid of them. Meet your fate 
boldly and never be afraid of anything. We can see no place in 
this world for fear, love, hate, pride, pity or anger. 

Wealth in itself is not worth having — it is- certainly not 
worth striving for. Praise and renown are of even less value 
than wealth. Praise and renown are mere trifles that will never 
compensate any one for the sacrifice they cost. 

Avoid all belief in necessity — and especially the belief that 
wrong, or evil, or cruelty, or injustice, is ever necessary. How 
shall we ever know that anything is necessary ? At best ne- 
cessity is only a matter of opinion. 

Never allow your opinion to be biased by love, hatred or 
prejudice. They are always an unsafe dependence. 

A king, as a man, is no bigger than other people, and ordi- 
narily he is not any better. 

Protection will always be found expensive and dangerous to 
the recipient. Neither is it something that can safely be relied on. 

Always regard advice, even if you do not follow it. But 
never give advice to others unasked. It is looked upon as pre- 
sumption, and it is a reflection upon the judgment of other peo- 
ple. It is easy enough to give good advice, but to find those who 
will follow good advice is another matter. Few people take 
their own remedies or observe their own rules. 

Do not be too confident. Remember that what you think, 
like what others think, is merely some one's opinion. Never rely 
upon proof, for nothing can be demonstrated. 

The end never justifies the means — the end and the means 
never have anything to do with each other. 

That we are applauded is no proof of our merit ; and that we 
are not applauded is no evidence of our want of merit. We are 
not able to see that applause enters into the case in any way. It 
is desirable to have the esteem of worthy men, but praise is a 
cheap article that can always be dispensed with. 

The men who rule this world are those who think ; and those 
who refuse to think are the slaves of the world. 

Avoid the practice of giving, except to the destitute. And 
in every case, exercise judgment. 

There can be no obligations resting upon us except those that 
we have voluntarily assumed. Moreover, it is a question whether 
we can load ourselves down with burdens self-imposed. Shall 
others be allowed to take advantage of our own stupidity or im- 
prudent action ? Can a man bind himself in slavery ? The world 
says not. Then how can a man obligate himself in any way ? 
We do not think he can. 



258 



CONCLUDING REMAEKS. 



Remember that the civilized world to-day says that might 
does not make right. But no rights arise from any other source. 
Hence it follows that there are no true rights. Doubtless this is 
the fact of the case. 

As a rule avoid doing the fighting yourself. Let your an- 
tagonist do the fighting, and let him wear himself out or break 
his neck, as the case may be. That is the famous Japanese Jui- 
jutsu, or art of self-defence. Nothing strains a man like butting 
against nothing. 

Seek no rewards for meritorious conduct of any kind. How 
shall you estimate the compensation due for a kind or generous 
deed ? When a man takes compensation for his good deeds he 
changes their character at once. No man should even demand 
gratitude for what he has done, nor praise for his achievements. 
Honors of all kinds are mere baubles. No man deserves honors 
or compensation from his fellow man. One deed is as meritori- 
ous as another. No man does more than he can do ; if one lifts 
more than another, it is merely because he is stronger. Why 
honor a man because he is strong, or even because he is wise or 
good? Reverence no man, since no man deserves reverence. 
Compensate no man, for no man is entitled to compensation. 

It is not worth a man's while to have lofty aims or high 
ambition. It is enough that he lives the life of a sensible and 
worthy citizen. 

Avoid contention and never seek to enforce conviction upon 
others. If you wish to be allowed to think what you think, let 
others have the same privilege. The only proper way to attain 
an improved public opinion is by giving people light and leav- 
ing them to reflect for themselves. 

About this one fact there can be no question : Under no cir- 
cumstances is one man greater or better than others. No man 
can with justice be compared to another. 

In all your doings seek to perform that which you are best 
fitted to perform. Measure your strength and never attempt 
impossibilities. If you build a house, build it as you want it 
built and as your means justify. How your neighbor builds his 
house, is not your concern. It is a good thing to have a mind of 
your own and to let that be your mentor under all circum- 
stances. 

Self-defence can never be used as a proper argument by 
which to justify a wrong. If an act is wrong, a man's doing it 
because he was afraid would not make it any better. 

There is more good in this world than is commonly thought, 
and what we consider to be evil often proves to be good. It 
must not be forgotten that giving tilings a bad name is no proof 



CONCLUDING REMARKS. 



259 



that they are bad. At best it is merely some one's opinion. 
What we call bad goes with others frequently by a pleasanter 
name. We must repeat again that what people say proves noth- 
ing. 

We should never entrust our secrets to other people. It is 
much better to have no secrets. People who hold our secrets 
have us to some extent in their power. The best way is to keep 
people at arm's length and give no one the advantage over us. 
Depending upon other people's good will and honest intentions, 
or even upon their friendship, is a most unsafe reliance. To 
depend upon the word of other people is apt to prove a fatal 
mistake. Do not believe all you hear. 

Make no promises and enter into no contracts ; no man 
should suffer himself to be bound by others, if it can be avoided. 

Do not praise people, do not blame people. To praise some is 
to blame others, by implication. 

No rule is more important than this : Always act rationally 
and live in a sensible manner. 

Can you teach a stone ? Can you teach a child that sleeps ? 
People can learn, it is true, but only when they are aroused and 
willing to learn. We do not see with our eyes alone. People 
may have eyes and see not. 

We would not say : Eat, drink and be merry, but rather, 
eat what you like, if it does not distress you, and drink sensible 
drinks according as thirst dictates. Nature is after all the best 
nurse and the best doctor that we can find — if we only under- 
stand what nature demands. In all things and at all times : 
Be moderate. That is really the golden rule. It is the quantity 
always that poisons. 

It is a foolish doctrine that is often taught, ' ' that we should 
love our neighbor as ourself!" Nobody believes in such a doc- 
trine, and nobody pretends to put it in practice. The world 
could not exist for a day on such an absurd basis as that. It is 
just the opposite of what nature teaches. Nature says : Pro- 
vide for yourself first — and let others look after themselves. 

Let there be some other motive by which men are to govern 
their action besides policy. If we love honesty or virtue, let it 
be for its own sake. Instead of asking if a certain course pays, 
ask if it is right and proper. When we come down to the facts 
of the case, it will be found that honesty and virtue do not al- 
ways pay ; in the commercial sense of the term, perhaps they do 
not usually pay. There are plenty of people who succeed by 
their wickedness, while there are hundreds and thousands of 
honest and worthy people who die in poverty and distress. No 
man succeeds by goodness alone. And yet, policy or no policy . 



260 



CONCLUDING REMARKS. 



an honest man and a gentleman will have nothing to do with 
vice or iniquity under any conditions. He will refuse to give 
such subjects any serious consideration. 

The last subject to which we propose to call attention in this 
connection is Waste — waste of energy, waste of thought, waste 
of feeling, waste of money, all of which is so prevalent and so 
noticeable in every department of civilized life. As sensible 
beings, why should we ever take a step or perform an action, or 
why should we invest a cent of money or exert ourselves in any 
manner, without being assured of some adequate return for the 
expenditure made or the exertion put forth? To waste know- 
ingly, or to misapply even the smallest amount of labor or prop- 
erty in any way, is the work of a senseless, if not a silly being. 
The savages, even in their ignorance, do far better than we do 
with all our enlightenment. Savages have some purpose, some 
direct object in view, in even the simplest step that they take. 
They stop when their work is completed, and with them nothing 
is ever overdone. How is it with the highly civilized ? A large 
proportion of all they do is waste ; and what makes the matter 
worse, they know it is waste. A considerable portion of their 
time and effort is devoted to securing money with which to pay 
the priest, the doctor, the lawyer, and the tax-gatherer, nearly 
all of which disbursements must come in the category of waste. 
Really, how much richer or happier are they for all the expendi- 
tures made in this direction ? We are always doing so much for 
other people and other beings, and remaining so neglectful of the 
duties we owe to ourselves ! We do so much for God ! We 
waste, absolutely waste, one day out of every seven in pretend- 
ing to worship the Lord — who knows little about us and probably 
cares less. If he is the omnipotent being that his devotees tell 
about, he has no need of our assistance or devotion. We are 
always ready to serve the king, and even to surrender our lives 
for his benefit, if he happens to consider the sacrifice necessary. 
Indeed, as willing and faithful servants of both the Lord and the 
king, we spend a good portion of our time in making sacrifices 
and performing ceremonies, solely for the benefit of other peo- 
ple. By nature, as well as by education, we have become ex- 
cessively devotional and reverential. 

All that we do without producing valuable or useful results 
must come under the head of waste ; all the books that we read 
without being made either wiser or better is waste, and so is 
every unnecessary and unprofitable investment of any kind. All 
idle exercise for the mere sake of exercise is waste, and so is all 
that we do merely in deference to fashion. All our superfluous 
clothing and ornament is waste, and all unusable room, every 
superfluous word or letter in our writing must come under the 
same head. Finally, nearly all that is paid to maintain govern- 
ment, to tax people, to enslave people, to punish people, to judge 
people, to protect or direct people, is waste in its most aggra- 
vated form. A very large portion of the time and money spent 
in acquiring an education, as things go to-day, is essentially 
a wasteful expenditure. It is much better to be absolutely idle 
than to put forth efforts which do not produce valuable results. 
It is far better to remain at home than to be perpetually travel- 
ing in the wrong direction. 



INDEX. 



A. 

Acquisition, 39. 

Accumulation, 44. 

Aims in Life. 50. 

Applause, 52. 

Anger, 53. 

Study of Art, 58. 

The Value of Art, 236. 

Attraction and Gravitation. 230 

B. 

What is Bad ? 22. 
Good or Bad, 38. 
Belief, 46. 
Business, 48. 

C. 

Cause and Effect, 123. 
Ceremonies, 37. 
The New Creed, 15. 
Creed and Constitution, 15. 
Character and Qualities. 105. 
Charity, 16, 35. 



Christian Doctrine, 55. 

Christianity, 64. 

No Compensation of one for 

Another Thing, 17. 
How to Conquer, 19. 
Crimes Unpunished, 21. 
Commands not to be Given. 23. 
Make no Contracts, 25. 
Complain Not, 33. 
Clear the Mind, 40. 
Our Confused Ideas, 134. 
A New View of Civilization. 245 

D. 

Death, Shall we Live After? 37. 
Our Desires, 42. 
Dying Continually, 42, 
Debts and Obligations, 103. 
The Value of Dancing, 240. 
Doctrines of the Work, 8. 

E. 

Educated Classes Slow to Adopt 
New Views, 12. 



262 



INDEX. 



Enemies not to be Loved, 27. 
Enemies and Friends, 45. 
New Views of Education, 154. 
Insufficiency of Evidence, 164. 
Expedient, 43. 

Expression and Relation, 128. 
Example and its Influence, 18. 

F. 

Fate and Luck, 33. 

Fame, 37. 

Fatalism, 40. 

Fear of the Lord, 17. 

Feeling, 48. 

Freedom, 58. 

Fractions, 138. 

Future to be Foretold, 20. 

G. 

What is Good ? 18. 

What Governs ? 55. 

What God Wants ! 57. 

Good and Morality, 89. 

Gifts and Gratitude, 99. 

The Policy of Government , 261. 

Gratitude, 101. 

H. 

Help Yourself, 49. 
Be Honest, 21. 
What is Heresy? 22. 
Your Honor, 40. 
Our Honor, 223. 

I. 

Independence in Action, 11. 

Impressions, 47. 

Identity and Individuality, 141. 

J. 

Judge Not, 26. 

Justice and Revenge, 176. 



K. 

How to get Knowledge, 22, 41. 
Do not Kill, 46. 
What is a King ? 50. 
What we Know, 51. 

L. 

Obey Laws, 26. 

Is Love Essential ? 35. 

Love, 41. 

Remedy in Law, 52. 
Who Shall Lecture Us ? 57. 
Love Unmasked, 114. 
Written Laws, 196. 
Importance of Labor, 255. 

M. 

True Merit, 16. 
m Moral Laws, 19. 
Morals Founded on Custom, 37. 
Means and End, 50. 
Mahometanism, 70. 
Modesty and Reverence, 95. 
Motives and Purposes, 149. 
The Marriage Question, 158. 
Analysis of Motion, 228. 
Morality, 92. 
The Value of Music, 244. 

N. 

Names, 19. 

Know Nature, 33. 

Necessary, 44. 

Our False Notions, 222. 

Numbers, 136. 

O. 

Opinions of Other People, 9,|53. 
Public Opinion, there is none, 1 9 
No Obligations, 25. 
Organizations not to be En- 
couraged, 41. 



INDEX. 



263 



Order. 48. 

Offences and Injuries, 53. 
P. 

The Press Conservative, not 

Radical, 14. 
The Present Concerns us, 21. 
Punishments, 38. 
No Real Power, 40. 
Pay as You Go, 43. 
Presents Corrupt, 46. 
Patience, 47. 
The People, 49. 
Protection, 54. 
Do in Your Place, 56. 
Prevention and Improvement, 

151. 

Punishment and Torture, 190. 
Delusiveness of Power, 184. 
Protection and its Fallacies, 
207. 

The Good of the Public, 218. 
Right to Property, 221. 
The True Policy, 250. 

R. 

Rewards and Punishments, 17. 

Revenge, 18, 178. 

No General Rule, 23. 

What is Right? 24, 36. 

No Remedy, 36. 

No Rights, 25. 

Religion, not to Condemn, 29. 
No Man Can be Deprived of 

Rights, 34. 
Rules Objectionable, 43. 
All is Right, 51. 
Religion, 59. 
The Rights of Man, 214. 
Reverence, 98. 

S. 

A Suppliant, 56. 
Salvation, 23, 72. 



Sacrifices, Make None, 31. 

Care of Self, 32. 

No Real Sins, 36. 

Scriptures, 37. 

Single Things, 38. 

As we See Things, 38. 

Nothing to be Seen, 39. 

Self Reliance, 40. 

Be Sensible, 45. 

No Secrets, 47. 

What Men Say, 47. 

Stand Up, 49. 

What Makes Strength ? 53. 

Seeing and Not Seeing, 53. 

Self Defence and Necessity, 211. 

T. 

Thoughts Not Property, 5. 

Thinkers are Interpreters for 
the World, 6. 

What is Truth ? 20. 

Truth not Everlasting, 30. 

People Always Think Correct- 
ly, 39. 

Do not Worry About Truth, 43. 

Love for Truth, 45. 

Value of Trifles, 48. 

Thinkers, 52. 

Truth and Thoughts, 81. 

Trials in Court, 171. 

What is Time ? 225. 

V. 

Value, Things Have no. 41. 
Instability of Values, 147. 

W. 

What is Wrong? 22, 54. 

No Excuse for Wrongs, 24. 

Blindness to Wrong, 34. 

Worship no One, 39. 

Waste, 43. 
j Worth, 50. 
I Waste, 260. 



Deacidified using the Bookkeeper process. 
Neutralizing agent: Magnesium Oxide 
Treatment Date: Dec. 2004 

PreservationTechnologies 

A WORLD LEADER IN PAPER PRESERVATION 

1 1 1 Thomson Park Drive 
Cranberry Township, PA 16066 
(724) 779-2111 



I 



